(12-19-2010 10:06 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Reb,

Outside of the occasional meteor. The Earth behaves as a closed system. The earth does not readily transfer energy with outside sources.


If anyone disagrees with this assesment. Please say so. If we can understand this we will go on to our 2nd question.

Two part question.
2nd Question

Does Carbon Dioxide have the ability to trap heat? Are there any signs that we are trapping heat today?

Your condensing schoolteacher attitude is not welcome any more than your investment advice. Besides for a schoolteacher you've proven yourself to be one dumb somebitch.

(12-19-2010 10:06 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  If anyone disagrees with this assesment...

Are you luckily calling it a "closed system" or are you knowledgeable about system theory?

The earth is practically a "closed system" but it is not an "isolated system". At all. The earth is always being hit by "stuff" and sending "stuff" out. The processes on Earth are pretty much closed (very little matter is exchanged), but if we are talking about energy and heat, then Earth is not isolated.

The planet is bombarded by energy from the Sun constantly. It also releases energy back into space. The amounts change over time depending on solar flares, seasons, temperatures, etc. etc. etc.

So, in a very general way it is closed (but over eons it is definitely open), in a way it is open (matter is constantly added or subtracted), but it is NOT isolated.

I'm guessing that I've kinda cut you off at the pass, or that you're going to take too many liberties with what is a closed system for your argument to have any validity.

(12-19-2010 10:51 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(12-19-2010 10:06 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Reb,

Outside of the occasional meteor. The Earth behaves as a closed system. The earth does not readily transfer energy with outside sources.


If anyone disagrees with this assesment. Please say so. If we can understand this we will go on to our 2nd question.

Two part question.
2nd Question

Does Carbon Dioxide have the ability to trap heat? Are there any signs that we are trapping heat today?

Your condensing schoolteacher attitude is not welcome any more than your investment advice. Besides for a schoolteacher you've proven yourself to be one dumb somebitch.

School teacher? He's a sub. ...and you don't need a B.S. to be a sub, so, well, I dunno.

(12-19-2010 10:06 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Reb,

Outside of the occasional meteor. The Earth behaves as a closed system. The earth does not readily transfer energy with outside sources.

Um, yeah. Why I said you probably didn't understand GRAVITATIONAL PULL by posing that question. As for CO2 trapping heat? As in how? From the atmosphere? Or other places? I always saw greenhouses (expelling of O) to trap more heat than an office (CO2). If you're referring to the atmosphere, CO2 is STILL a VERY small portion.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...rtions.svg

It's a very simple series of questions.

1. Does the Earth behave as a closed system?

2. Does CO2 have the ability to trap energy from the sun?

Ask yourself these two questions. Answer them and we can continue. I need to understand where the ignorance lies.

Reb, Torch, anyone.

(12-20-2010 12:11 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I need to understand where the ignorance lies.

Ahh, there it is. If we don't believe in this myth, we're ignorant.

(12-20-2010 12:11 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's a very simple series of questions.

1. Does the Earth behave as a closed system?

2. Does CO2 have the ability to trap energy from the sun?

Ask yourself these two questions. Answer them and we can continue. I need to understand where the ignorance lies.

Look within, Mach.

BTW, don't patronize me, you stupid little substitute-teaching fk.

It's the need to understand where the disconnect is? Yes, that's ignorance or miscommunication. If x causes y to happen. I need to 1st understand if you believe y happens. Then we can continue. Since no one will answer. I'll answer the 1st 2 for you.

1. Yes the earth acts as a closed system.

2. Yes Carbon Dioxide does trap heat from the sun (check it out Reb, it's not the only one) in ever increasing numbers. Anyone disagree?

I'll give it 24 hours. Maybe we can update this post every day. Have a daily lesson to see where the disconnect lies.

(12-20-2010 12:25 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's the need to understand where the disconnect is? Yes, that's ignorance or miscommunication. If x causes y to happen. I need to 1st understand if you believe y happens. Then we can continue. Since no one will answer. I'll answer the 1st 2 for you.

1. Yes the earth acts as a closed system.

Wrong right off the bat. Ever hear of the Sun?

Furthermore, ever hear of thermal radiation?

Quote:2. Yes Carbon Dioxide does trap heat from the sun (check it out Reb, it's not the only one) in ever increasing numbers. Anyone disagree?

Yes, CO2's ability to trap heat is actually in ever decreasing numbers, b/c the absorption potential is about saturated.

It's worth noting that the absorption coefficient and emissivity constant for a molecule are the same thing for thermal quanta of energy. So, when the CO2 molecules have vibration bands excited through collisions (i.e. heat) to the point of saturation, they actually emit thermal radiation at a the same rate as they absorb it.

In short, the feedback mechanisms favor checking of temperatures, rather than run-away increases.

You have to make some serious assumptions about positive feedback to get your global warming scenario. Assumptions that don't hold up under empirical investigation in the lab, or in the atmosphere.

(12-20-2010 12:29 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I'll give it 24 hours. Maybe we can update this post every day. Have a daily lesson to see where the disconnect lies.

Ok, you gonna pay me for the time and exaspiration it takes to school you?

This is why you are dangerous. I've never heard of absorbtion potential w CO2. The shyte you guys come up with. Any links? Preferbably from a reputable resource. No "Watts up with That" does not qualify. Any reputable source please. I am well read in this subject and have NEVER heard of such a thing.

Who are your sources, Mach? The same GW scientists that have been proven frauds?

(12-20-2010 01:21 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is why you are dangerous. I've never heard of absorbtion potential w CO2. The shyte you guys come up with. Any links? Preferbably from a reputable resource. No "Watts up with That" does not qualify. Any reputable source please. I am well read in this subject and have NEVER heard of such a thing.

Thank you for admitting the ignorance here is from YOU!!!

Since you know nothing, any chance you'll shut up?

(12-20-2010 01:21 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is why you are dangerous. I've never heard of absorbtion potential w CO2. The shyte you guys come up with. Any links? Preferbably from a reputable resource. No "Watts up with That" does not qualify. Any reputable source please. I am well read in this subject and have NEVER heard of such a thing.

This is a decent start

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=231437

And if you're really "well read" I find it hard you've never heard of it. Maybe you don't agree, but it's a common discussion.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/saturate...vanced.htm

I think I've discovered some of the errors in the post immediately above. I think they're obtuse on purpose, the physics forums are far easier to follow...that should tell you something.

You may also want to look up "Lamb-dip spectroscopy" which, while not identical to this situation, does provide some interesting studies on the effect of saturation.

Rebel... are you completely daft? That was the whole point, they weren't frauds. Their findings were proven to be legitimate by numerous independent counsels. Even conservative Fox News reported as much.

And yes.. a picture of snow, the kind of example someone who knows nothing about climate change would try to use to prove their point. Well done.

SO, basically, Too cold? Global warming. Too hot? Global warming. Too wet? Global warming. Too dry? Global warming. Too many hurricanes in one season? Global warming. Don't meet our expectations of numbered hurricanes in one season? Global warming.

That it? Thanks, but no thanks. Call me skeptical. ...and what findings were proven legitimate? Scientists are leaving the AGW camp in droves.

http://iceagenow.com/Top_Scientists_say_..._a_lie.htm

The Earth is going through the same thing it's been going through for over 4 billion years.