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

[IBDaMann]

Ya know, after a while this sort of schtick really grates.

Tell me about it.

I mean it's not even clever or insightful, it's just literally screaming "Nuh huh!" after someone says something.

You can stop anytime.

Does this sort of shitposting (which you surely MUST know is a joke) really get you off? Ewww.

Let me know when you want to learn something.

Don't think that I'm the only one who has noticed how you refuse to unequivocally declare your insistence that the temperature of a cloud of nitrogen gas in close proximity to the sun will fall to absolute zero because it cannot abosrb any infrared.

You have acknowledged defeat. There really isn't anything left to discuss.

 

[Kafka]

Tell me about it.


You can stop anytime.


Let me know when you want to learn something.

Don't think that I'm the only one who has noticed how you refuse to unequivocally declare your insistence that the temperature of a cloud of nitrogen gas in close proximity to the sun will fall to absolute zero because it cannot abosrb any infrared.

You have acknowledged defeat. There really isn't anything left to discuss.

Yeah, you're really boring. Try switching it up and try actually understanding the science.

BTW: I'm still waiting on you to show me the IR absorption bands for N2 and O2.

 

[ZenMode]

It is not possible to get you to be honest. You insist on obscuring your argument in ambiguity. As such, your argument is discarded.

If you won't specify "average global equilibrium temperature" then there is no point in discussing the matter further with you.


You're obfuscating your errors.

I'm working up to the 'equilibrium' temperature, but you really can't bring yourself to acknowledge things that we all know are true.

I'll try again....

• The Earth's atmosphere absolutely impacts temperatures on Earth. Without an atmosphere, we'd all be dead because the temperature swings would be so extreme.
• The energy from the Sun is different form than the energy leaving the Earth
• The Earth's atmosphere limits the amount of the Sun's energy that gets to the Earth's surface, which also limits the high temperatures.
• The atmosphere also slows how quickly energy leaves the earth's surface, back into space, which is why the low temperatures aren't as low as they'd be otherwise.

What, that I bulleted above, do you disagree with.

 

[Kafka]

The role of Greenhouse Gases in the Earth's Surface Temperature:

‘Greenhouse gases’ are crucial to keeping our planet at a suitable temperature for life. Without the natural greenhouse effect, the heat emitted by the Earth would simply pass outwards from the Earth’s surface into space and the Earth would have an average temperature of about -20°C

(SOURCE)

Molecules that absorb IR:

"Oxygen and nitrogen don’t interfere with infrared waves in the atmosphere. That’s because molecules are picky about the range of wavelengths that they interact with, Smerdon explained. 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."

(SOURCE)

"Smerdon says that the reason why some molecules absorb infrared waves and some don’t “depends on their geometry and their composition.” He explained that oxygen and nitrogen molecules are simple — they’re each made up of only two atoms of the same element — which narrows their movements and the variety of wavelengths they can interact with. But greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane are made up of three or more atoms, which gives them a larger variety of ways to stretch and bend and twist. That means they can absorb a wider range of wavelengths — including infrared waves."

(IBID)

"In order for a vibration to absorb infrared radiation and become excited, the molecule must change its dipole moment during the vibration. Homonuclear diatomic molecules such as N2 and O2 do not have dipole moments. If the molecule undergoes a stretching motion as shown in Figure 4.1.14.1.1, where the spheres represent the two nuclei, there is no change in the dipole moment during the vibrational motion, therefore N2 and O2 do not absorb infrared radiation."

(SOURCE)

"Not all gas molecules are able to absorb IR radiation. For example, nitrogen (N2) and oxygen (O2), which make up more than 90% of Earth's atmosphere, do not absorb infrared photons. CO2 molecules can vibrate in ways that simpler nitrogen and oxygen molecules cannot, which allows CO2 molecules to capture the IR photons."

(SOURCE)

 

[IBDaMann]

Try switching it up and try actually understanding the science.

I understand that a nitrogen cloud in close proximity to the sun will get really hot from absorbing intense IR. You, on the other hand, believe that nitrogen does not absorb IR and that such a cloud would drop to absolute zero.

Too funny.

BTW: I'm still waiting on you to show me the IR absorption bands for N2 and O2.

I'm still waiting for you to clue in that IR is one very wide frequency band, and not just a particular frequency.

 

[IBDaMann]

The role of Greenhouse Gases in the Earth's Surface Temperature:
(SOURCE)

You gullibly believe everything you read on the internet. You gullibly believe everything you are told by Columbia university. I pity you.

I've already explained your errors, yet rather than indepedently reasearch what I taught you, you instead opted to chant your religious prayers.

Enjoy your faith. For the moment, I'm going to mock you for being someone who thinks that everything he reads on the internet is true, and who will never apply any sort of critical reasoning.

 

[IBDaMann]

I'm working up to the 'equilibrium' temperature, but you really can't bring yourself to acknowledge things that we all know are true.

I'm not sure when you got the impression that my time was yours to waste, but you're wasting my time and I'm going to sit that out.

State your point. Don't "lead up to it." I acknowledge all physics. I reject your bogus religious dogma.

I'll try again....

Don't. State your FINAL point, i.e. your theorem, your thesis statement, what you are saying. I acknowledge that temperature can change.

What, that I bulleted above, do you disagree with.

Your intentional obfuscation. I told you to not simply use "temperature," especially when you haven't the vaguest idea what you even mean by that. Jump right to using "average global equilibrium temperature." I absolutely do not accept any erroneous statement that seeks to conflate "average global equilibrium temperature" with "temperature."

 

[ZenMode]

I'm not sure when you got the impression that my time was yours to waste, but you're wasting my time and I'm going to sit that out.

State your point. Don't "lead up to it." I acknowledge all physics. I reject your bogus religious dogma.


Don't. State your FINAL point, i.e. your theorem, your thesis statement, what you are saying. I acknowledge that temperature can change.



Your intentional obfuscation. I told you to not simply use "temperature," especially when you haven't the vaguest idea what you even mean by that. Jump right to using "average global equilibrium temperature." I absolutely do not accept any erroneous statement that seeks to conflate "average global equilibrium temperature" with "temperature."

The atmosphere, as we all know, is what prevents the huge temperature swings. It does that by deflecting some of the sun's energy back to outer space, preventing the extreme highs, and slowing the loss of thermal energy into space, preventing the extreme lows.

If the composition of the atmosphere changed in a way that more energy got in or less energy got out it would be impossible for average temperature on Earth to remain unchanged because the sun's energy is always, without exception, adding energy.

 

[IBDaMann]

The atmosphere, as we all know, is what prevents the huge temperature swings [plural].

Temperature swings are not the average global equilibrium temperature (singular).

It does that by deflecting some of the sun's energy back to outer space,

Stop with the lame attempt at bogus physics-sounding gibberish. You're wrong.

 

[ZenMode]

Temperature swings are not the average global equilibrium temperature (singular).


Stop with the lame attempt at bogus physics-sounding gibberish. You're wrong.

Correct - swings. Swinging to a really high temperature to a really low temperature.

I'm not wrong. We know how much energy comes from the Sun. We know how much gets to the Earth's surface and how much doesn't.

If you believe I'm wrong, then explain how the atmosphere prevents extreme highs and extreme lows.

 

[gfm7175]

I'm working up to the 'equilibrium' temperature,

No you're not... you're EVADING any and all discussion about Earth's average global equilibrium temperature.

 

[IBDaMann]

Correct - swings [plural].

Correct - they are not the average global equilibrium temperature [singular].

I'm not wrong.

Correct. You are in error.

We know how much gets to the Earth's surface and how much doesn't.

You do not know this because you do not know what the "surface" is, and that is everything. Currently, you are treating parts of the earth as though they are not parts of the earth, and that gets your argument discarded immediately. Currently, you refer to energy that is merely being redistributed on the planet as "leaving" and/or "returning to" Earth. This nonsense gets your argument discarded immediately.

If you believe I'm wrong, then explain how the atmosphere prevents extreme highs and extreme lows.

If you believe you are correct, then explain how temperature swings (plural) is semantically equivalent to the average global equilibrium temperature (singular).

 

[gfm7175]

The role of Greenhouse Gases in the Earth's Surface Temperature:
(SOURCE)

Molecules that absorb IR:
(SOURCE)

(IBID)

(SOURCE)

(SOURCE)

Your sources are all invalid (they aren't science). Just stick to the science itself.

 

[IBDaMann]

You misspelled

 

[gfm7175]

Correct - swings. Swinging to a really high temperature to a really low temperature.

... obviously you are NOT making reference to Earth's average global equilibrium temperature.

Stop EVADING......

I'm not wrong. We know how much energy comes from the Sun. We know how much gets to the Earth's surface and how much doesn't.

If you believe I'm wrong, then explain how the atmosphere prevents extreme highs and extreme lows.

Stop evading.

 

[ZenMode]

Correct - they are not the average global equilibrium temperature [singular].


Correct. You are in error.


You do not know this because you do not know what the "surface" is, and that is everything. Currently, you are treating parts of the earth as though they are not parts of the earth, and that gets your argument discarded immediately. Currently, you refer to energy that is merely being redistributed on the planet as "leaving" and/or "returning to" Earth. This nonsense gets your argument discarded immediately.


If you believe you are correct, then explain how temperature swings (plural) is semantically equivalent to the average global equilibrium temperature (singular).

Lots of avoidance.

Again, if I'm wrong about how the atmosphere, then explain how it prevents extreme highs and extreme lows.

 

[ZenMode]

... obviously you are NOT making reference to Earth's average global equilibrium temperature.

Stop EVADING......

Stop evading.

The discussion isn't only about Earth's average global temperature, though I'm sure you both will use that as an excuse to avoid a large discussion, answering simple questions and addressing simpler requests.

 

[IBDaMann]

Lots of avoidance.

Yes, and I wish you would stop.

Again, if I'm wrong about how the atmosphere, then explain how it prevents extreme highs and extreme lows.

This question is in the wrong thread. Create a thread for it and I'll gladly give you an answer.

 

[IBDaMann]

The discussion isn't only about Earth's average global temperature,

Yes, it is only about how greenhouse gas affects Earth's average global equilibrium temperature.

 

[ZenMode]

Yes, and I wish you would stop.


This question is in the wrong thread. Create a thread for it and I'll gladly give you an answer.

Ok, since you know that the atmosphere DOES prevent extreme temperature highs and lows, then you also know there is some characteristic of the atmosphere that accomplish this.

Meaning that any change in the composition of the Earth's atmosphere, which currently impacts temperature on Earth, could not only impact the highs and lows, but could also impact average temperature at any point on the planet, right?