Challenging Hume to a Debate #2 - Physics of the Global Warming Faith : Is Greenhouse Effect Even Possible?

[Into the Night]

You already chose to exclude yourself from an intelligent conversation when you claimed the atmosphere has no impact on temperatures.

Argument of the Stone fallacy.

 

[AProudLefty]

You posted to the wrong person, Lefty.

Nope I didn't. You are Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

That's your opinion, not a fact and it's especially irrelevant in a hypothetical discussion.

Physics is not 'my opinion'. You are simply choosing to ignore theories of science.

The atmosphere on Earth, just as it does on all planets, directly impacts high and low temperatures.

It has no capability to warm the Earth.

You already know this, but insist on playing dumb.

You are describing yourself. It is YOU ignoring theories of science and mindlessly repeating questions that have already been answered.

So, in an effort to further expose your dishonestly and game playing, I'll ask you the same question that others avoid answering.

Why/how does the Earth's atmosphere keep overnight temperatures from being as low as they normally would be? In other words, without an atmosphere, much more of the suns energy would get to the surface of the Earth, creating significantly higher high temperatures, but that energy would leave the Earth's surface, back into space, more quickly, resulting in much colder evenings.

So, how does the atmosphere do that?

RQAA.

 

[ZenMode]

Argument of the Stone fallacy.

No argument of anything. You are unable to engage is an honest conversation because you are a) a troll, b) liar, c) delusional.

 

[Into the Night]

Nope I didn't. You are Sybil.

I am not Sybil, Lefty. You need to post to Doc or one of his socks.

 

[Into the Night]

No argument of anything.

Argument of the Stone fallacy.

You are unable to engage is an honest conversation because you are a) a troll, b) liar, c) delusional.

Inversion fallacy.

 

[ZenMode]

Physics is not 'my opinion'. You are simply choosing to ignore theories of science.

It has no capability to warm the Earth.

You are describing yourself. It is YOU ignoring theories of science and mindlessly repeating questions that have already been answered.

RQAA.

"RQAA."

Nope. A response isn't the same thing as an answer.

Do you have an answer for the question i asked?

Why/how does the Earth's atmosphere keep overnight temperatures from being as low as they normally would be? In other words, without an atmosphere, much more of the suns energy would get to the surface of the Earth, creating significantly higher high temperatures, but that energy would leave the Earth's surface, back into space, more quickly, resulting in much colder evenings.

So, how does the atmosphere do that?

 

[IBDaMann]

That's your opinion, not a fact and it's especially irrelevant in a hypothetical discussion.

Hold on. Is it a fact that there is an ocean on Earth? Is it a fact that water evaporates?

It seems to me that it is a fact that if the Earth's atmosphere were to magically vanish, another atmosphere of water vapor would immediately form.

The atmosphere on Earth, just as it does on all planets, directly impacts high and low temperatures.

... but you are acknowledging that the average global equilibrium temperature remains the same, despite any temperature differences between daytime and nighttime. I'm sure you can understand why many would prefer to not get involved in your sideline obsession about how nighttime and daytime temperature differences are inversely proportional to the quantity of the atmosphere.

So, in an effort to further expose your dishonestly and game playing, I'll ask you the same question that others avoid answering.

It has been answered literally hundreds of times in many different ways that have each been repeated many different times ... all because you are too stupid to learn.

Why/how does the Earth's atmosphere keep overnight temperatures from being as low as they normally would be?

Subjunctive fallacy. There are no "normally/otherwise-should'a-would'a-could'as" in science.

Also, I notice your continuing denial of the daytime side of the moon. Did you think I would somehow miss your omission of "keep daytime temperatures from being as high as they normally would be?" You did, didn't you? You really thought I wouldn't notice.

You are on notice that any argument interwoven with daytime-side-of-the-moon-denial is immediately discarded.

Oh, by the way, your question is immediately discarded.

In other words, without an atmosphere, much more of the [Earth's absorbed thermal] energy would be [distributed differently]

FTFY. Correct. The earth's average global equilibrium temperature, which is what it is, would remain exactly the same, as you acknowledge when you aren't tap dancing.

creating significantly higher high temperatures,

I notice your continuing denial of the daytime side of the moon. You thought I wouldn't notice your blatant omission of "creating significantly lower low temperatures". You keep thinking that I won't ever notice.

 

[ZenMode]

Hold on. Is it a fact that there is an ocean on Earth? Is it a fact that water evaporates?

It seems to me that it is a fact that if the Earth's atmosphere were to magically vanish, another atmosphere of water vapor would immediately form.


... but you are acknowledging that the average global equilibrium temperature remains the same, despite any temperature differences between daytime and nighttime. I'm sure you can understand why many would prefer to not get involved in your sideline obsession about how nighttime and daytime temperature differences are inversely proportional to the quantity of the atmosphere.


It has been answered literally hundreds of times in many different ways that have each been repeated many different times ... all because you are too stupid to learn.


Subjunctive fallacy. There are no "normally/otherwise-should'a-would'a-could'as" in science.

Also, I notice your continuing denial of the daytime side of the moon. Did you think I would somehow miss your omission of "keep daytime temperatures from being as high as they normally would be?" You did, didn't you? You really thought I wouldn't notice.

You are on notice that any argument interwoven with daytime-side-of-the-moon-denial is immediately discarded.

Oh, by the way, your question is immediately discarded.


FTFY. Correct. The earth's average global equilibrium temperature, which is what it is, would remain exactly the same, as you acknowledge when you aren't tap dancing.



I notice your continuing denial of the daytime side of the moon. You thought I wouldn't notice your blatant omission of "creating significantly lower low temperatures". You keep thinking that I won't ever notice.

"Subjunctive fallacy. There are no "normally/otherwise-should'a-would'a-could'as" in science. "

Is is a fact that the Earth's atmosphere impacts high and low temperatures on Earth. How does the atmosphere perform this function?

I'll just keep asking until you answer or run away, little Starling....

 

[IBDaMann]

This statement is just as plausible has believing that Trump is fit to be president.

I see that you need to tip your king. Let me know when you want to play again.

 

[IBDaMann]

Is is a fact that the Earth's atmosphere impacts high and low temperatures on Earth.

Is there a daytime side of the moon?

 

[IBDaMann]

You already chose to exclude yourself from an intelligent conversation when you claimed the atmosphere has no impact on temperatures.

You were the one who fled by not specifying which temperatures.

 

[ZenMode]

Is there a daytime side of the moon?

Sorry, no detours, Cap'n Avoidance.

It is a fact that the earth's atmosphere impacts high and low temperatures on Earth. How does it perform this function?

 

[gfm7175]

You're responding to something I never said.

I responded to the post that you made.

I asked how the Earth's atmosphere prevents overnight low temperatures from being AS LOW as they otherwise would?

And I asked "WTF?!" to that.

The Earth isn't a greenhouse or a tent,

Right. Glad you've finally learned THAT much at least.

so we know that there isn't a solid physical barrier in outer space.

Right, so any and all references to a "greenhouse" or a "glass barrier" as an attempt to explain a supposed "rise in Earth's average global equilibrium temperature" are all summarily dismissed.

All we have is the atmosphere.

Which IS A PART OF EARTH. "The atmosphere" is INCLUDED in the discussion of Earth's average global equilibrium temperature. You cannot pick and choose when to treat it as separate from Earth and when to treat it as being a part of Earth. You cannot redistribute thermal energy from one part of Earth to another part of Earth and pretend as if that redistribution has somehow ADDED thermal energy to Earth.

So, What function does it perform to cause that end result?

So, Where is the additional thermal energy coming from that is required in order to increase Earth's average global equilibrium temperature?

 

[ZenMode]

You were the one who fled by not specifying which temperatures.

Liar. I clarified that I was talking about highs and lows repeatedly.

 

[IBDaMann]

Is this the same science that makes you unable to acknowledge a basic truth about the impact of the Earth's atmosphere on high and low temperatures, or is this a different science?

Are you asking me to acknowledge the daytime side of the moon?

OK, I so acknowledge.

 

[ZenMode]

I responded to the post that you made.

And I asked "WTF?!" to that.

Right. Glad you've finally learned THAT much at least.

Right, so any and all references to a "greenhouse" or a "glass barrier" as an attempt to explain a supposed "rise in Earth's average global equilibrium temperature" are all summarily dismissed.

Which IS A PART OF EARTH. "The atmosphere" is INCLUDED in the discussion of Earth's average global equilibrium temperature. You cannot pick and choose when to treat it as separate from Earth and when to treat it as being a part of Earth. You cannot redistribute thermal energy from one part of Earth to another part of Earth and pretend as if that redistribution has somehow ADDED thermal energy to Earth.

So, Where is the additional thermal energy coming from that is required in order to increase Earth's average global equilibrium temperature?

Lots of words just to deflect and change the subject. I'll pass on that.

So, again, how does the Earth's atmosphere impact high and low temperatures on Earth? How is it able to perform that function since the atmosphere isn't a solid structure?

Yes, I'm emphasizing the question mark at the end of my questions because, for some reason, some people on this forum seem to be baffled by what is a question vs a statement and the difference between a response and an answer.

 

[ZenMode]

Are you asking me to acknowledge the daytime side of the moon?

OK, I so acknowledge.

So, again, how does the Earth's atmosphere impact high and low temperatures on Earth? How is it able to perform that function since the atmosphere isn't a solid structure?

 

[IBDaMann]

Liar. I clarified that I was talking about highs and lows repeatedly.

... but not in that question. You simply used the word "temperatures" as you love to do.

 

[IBDaMann]

So, again, how does the Earth's atmosphere impact high and low temperatures on Earth?

Which of earth's temperatures are you addressing?

How is it able to perform that function since the atmosphere isn't a solid structure?

Lots of words just to deflect and change the subject to that of your bizarre obsession. I bet he'll pass on that.