$1B Climate Change Denial Industry: Getting Rich Telling Lies: open discussion

[Into the Night]

Oh wow.
We are in the midst of the most major mass extinction event of all time.

What mass extinction is occurring?

How could you not know this?

Because it isn't happening.

FYI 40% of all bees died last year,

More than that! Bees die. They have a very short life span.

giraffes were just added to the endanger ed species lists

A list is not an extinction.

and elephants are in severe danger.

They are? I see plenty of elephants. I see plenty of giraffes too.

 

[Into the Night]

You mean the geocentric theory is still valid?

Copernicus and Galileo had "no proof?"

Galileo falsified the terracentric theory and model of the universe. Over time, the solar centric model was also falsified.

 

[Into the Night]

What is being made out of nothing?
No one is claiming that.

You are. Where is the additional energy required to raise the temperature coming from?

Who said heat was flowing from a colder gas to a warmer surface?

You are. How does CO2, a gas that is colder than the surface, heat the surface?

You last bullet point is self contradictory and indicates a comple misunderstanding of heat.

Heat is the transfer of thermal energy. You are openly denying the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

Your last post proves you are a hypocrite since they are entirely faith based.

The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law are existing theories of science. They have not been falsified. You are just discarding them.

 

[Into the Night]

Yup.
And di hydrogen oxide is the lone "greenhouse" gas that can accomplish greenhouse effect because it alone can change its state in free atmosphere. It CAN absorb the energy long enough to redirect back to a cooler earth.
But man cannot be implicated so the rest had to be manufactured to support the scam.

The surface is not cooler than the atmosphere.

 

[Into the Night]

Noticed you didn't address my question on the geocentric theory

Nevertheless, you want definitions;

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

NASA is not science. NASA is a government agency. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Anyone, even people that work for NASA, that supports 'greenhouse effect' is denying science.

Science is not a cause. It is not an effect. It is not evidence. It is not consensus. It is not a government agency.

Science is just a set of falsifiable theories.

 

[Rune]

You are. Where is the additional energy required to raise the temperature coming from?

You are. How does CO2, a gas that is colder than the surface, heat the surface?

Heat is the transfer of thermal energy. You are openly denying the Stefan-Boltzmann law.

The 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law are existing theories of science. They have not been falsified. You are just discarding them.

No additional energy is required, less escapes back into space.

What else eludes your understanding?

 

[Rune]

What mass extinction is occurring?

Because it isn't happening.

More than that! Bees die. They have a very short life span.

A list is not an extinction.

They are? I see plenty of elephants. I see plenty of giraffes too.

Stay ignorant.

 

[Cypress]

No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth (or anything else).

* You can't create energy out of nothing.
* You can't make heat flow from a colder gas to a warmer surface.
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth by 'trapping' heat and have the Earth warm at the same time.

We don't burn fossils for fuels. Fossils don't burn. We burn carbon based fuels such as coal, oil, or natural gas. CO2 is incapable of warming the Earth.

Thanks for providing an exceptional - but also weirdly comical - example of the ignorance of the Climate Denial Cabal.

There is no point in even wasting valuable time and brainpower engaging this level of stupidity, other than to say it was proven experimentally over a century ago that the CO2 molecule has the capacity to absorb and re-emit IR radiation from the earth's surface. There is no debate about this, and the level of uncertainty is approximately zero percent.

And the term fossil fuels is a colloquialism that is widely understood by speakers of the English language. Any attempts to word smith it demonstrate either a lack of mastery of standard conversational English language at best, or a very strange preoccupation with nitpickery and neurotic word-smithing at worst.

 

[Into the Night]

No additional energy is required, less escapes back into space.

What else eludes your understanding?

Sorry dude, that violates the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You cannot reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its radiance at the same time. This law states:

radiance = SBconstant * emissivity * temperature ^ 4
Where radiance is in watts/sq meter,
emissivity is a measured constant,
SBconstant is a constant of nature,
temperature is in deg K.

If radiance goes down, temperature MUST go down with it. It does not increase. It DECREASES.

You cannot trap light. You cannot trap heat.

 

[Into the Night]

I stand corrected on this. Since "climate change" and "global warming" have not been defined, it's impossible for AGW to be a hypothesis. In fact, I'd argue that it's not even an explanatory arguement since it's attempt to explain something that has yet to be defined.


It can be confusing.

Especially with so much disinformation being spread, even by universities.

 

[Into the Night]

Stay ignorant.

No, this is YOU. I understand the science you are denying.

 

[Celticguy]

It is not possible to measure a global sea level. There is no reference point.

Right so its really just another algorithm. But when those very measurements were compared without fudging its been shown that there has been a gradual consistant rise for as long as there was data.

Unknown.

With certainty, no. With the data available, yeah.

Bingo. This is right on the bullseye.

Why?

Barrier islands come, go move this way and that. Its tides and storms. Old as time.

Why ? You mean go there ? Its beautiful, its the ocean.

 

[Celticguy]

The surface is not cooler than the atmosphere.

The atmosphere ? No. The atmosphere is a collection of free molecules and atoms. A few can absorb thermal energy, water for example. Then for that instant they do become warmer. CO2 isnt one of them.

 

[Into the Night]

Thanks for providing an exceptional - but also weirdly comical - example of the ignorance of the Climate Denial Cabal.

I do not deny climate. There are is no such thing as a global climate, however. There is no such thing as a global weather.

There is no point in even wasting valuable time and brainpower engaging this level of stupidity,

The theories of science you are choosing to ignore is not stupidity.

other than to say it was proven experimentally

There are no proofs in science. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

over a century ago that the CO2 molecule has the capacity to absorb and re-emit IR radiation from the earth's surface.

CO2 does absorb infrared light. That is nothing more than the surface cooling itself heating the air, same as conductive heating does. That does not warm the Earth. CO2 is colder than the surface. It cannot in turn heat the surface. You can't heat a warmer object with a colder one.

There is no debate about this, and the level of uncertainty is approximately zero percent.

No, you are simply ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Absorption of surface infrared by CO2 does not warm the Earth.

And the term fossil fuels is a colloquialism that is widely understood by speakers of the English language.

No, it was taught in schools that oil comes from fossils. It doesn't.

Any attempts to word smith it

This is YOUR attempt.

demonstrate either a lack of mastery of standard conversational English language at best, or a very strange preoccupation with nitpickery and neurotic word-smithing at worst.

It is YOU that is nitpicking here. Right here. In your post.

 

[Into the Night]

Right so its really just another algorithm. But when those very measurements were compared without fudging its been shown that there has been a gradual consistant rise for as long as there was data.

There is no data.

With certainty, no. With the data available, yeah.

There is no data.

Barrier islands come, go move this way and that. Its tides and storms. Old as time.

That has nothing to do with sea level.

Why ? You mean go there ? Its beautiful, its the ocean.

You have lost context to answer this question. Consider it withdrawn.

 

[Into the Night]

The atmosphere ? No. The atmosphere is a collection of free molecules and atoms.

You noticed that, eh?

A few can absorb thermal energy, water for example.

Thermal energy isn't absorbed. Any matter warmer than absolute zero has thermal energy.

Then for that instant they do become warmer.

Thermal energy IS temperature.

CO2 isnt one of them.

CO2 is above absolute zero. It has thermal energy just like everything else.

 

[Rune]

Sorry dude, that violates the Stefan-Boltzmann law. You cannot reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its radiance at the same time. This law states:

radiance = SBconstant * emissivity * temperature ^ 4
Where radiance is in watts/sq meter,
emissivity is a measured constant,
SBconstant is a constant of nature,
temperature is in deg K.

If radiance goes down, temperature MUST go down with it. It does not increase. It DECREASES.

You cannot trap light. You cannot trap heat.

Yes, I get that you don't understand the mechanics of heat.
You don't need to make it any clearer.
Absolutely no one claimed the radiance is increased, but keep trying.

 

[Rune]

I do not deny climate. There are is no such thing as a global climate, however. There is no such thing as a global weather.

The theories of science you are choosing to ignore is not stupidity.

There are no proofs in science. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

CO2 does absorb infrared light. That is nothing more than the surface cooling itself heating the air, same as conductive heating does. That does not warm the Earth. CO2 is colder than the surface. It cannot in turn heat the surface. You can't heat a warmer object with a colder one.

No, you are simply ignoring the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Absorption of surface infrared by CO2 does not warm the Earth.

No, it was taught in schools that oil comes from fossils. It doesn't.

This is YOUR attempt.

It is YOU that is nitpicking here. Right here. In your post.

So according to your misapplied laws, heat pumps don't work. CO2 and water vapor are not greenhouse gases.
Green houses do not work.

Citation required on your claim that schools taught that fossil fuels were made from fossils.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, I get that you don't understand the mechanics of heat.

But I do. Part of my business is to develop cooling systems for engines.

You don't need to make it any clearer.

It is clear you simply want to simply deny the Stefan-Boltzmann law and the laws of thermodynamics.

Absolutely no one claimed the radiance is increased, but keep trying.

No additional energy is required, less escapes back into space.

You did. Have you already forgotten what you said, or you intentionally lying?

 

[Into the Night]

So according to your misapplied laws,

They are not misapplied. They apply everywhere, all the time.

heat pumps don't work.

Heat pumps do not heat anything with something that is colder by themselves. They require additional energy to work. Entropy can not decrease in any system. It can only increase or stay the same. Heat only flows from hot to cold.

CO2 and water vapor are not greenhouse gases.

Correct. There is no such thing as a 'greenhouse' gas.

Green houses do not work.

Yes they do. They do not use special gases. They work by reducing heat, specifically convective heat.

Citation required on your claim that schools taught that fossil fuels were made from fossils.

No. Do your own footwork if you are interested, lazy bum.