Question for JPP Climate Enthusiasts

Havana Moon said:
Light from the Sun excites electrons in atoms. So how do photons get converted to heat? Atoms are constantly vibrating, some of them vibrate sufficiently that their vibrational energy is roughly equal to the photons absorbed from the Sun, such that they are in resonance with the solar energy. Those atoms then make a quantum transition from 'electronically excited' to 'vibrationally excited,' meaning that the energy causes the whole atom to move, in other words to heat up. The atoms which make the jump to vibrational excitation soon collide into neighbouring atoms, thus dissipating their vibrational energy causing them to heat up likewise.

Microwave ovens are tuned to the frequency that causes molecules of water to rotate, and the ensuing friction causes heating of water-containing substances. This is how microwave ovens cook food by heating water molecules and how greenhouse gases adsorb electromagnetic energy and convert it to heat energy.

View attachment 11645

View attachment 11646
Click to expand...

Thanks for dong the heavy lifting, Havana. Photon physics are not in my wheelhouse.

When the clouds/gases are warmed up, does that heat transfer directly to the rest of the atmosphere? ... or does it go back to the surface in infrared form? ... or a bit of both?
 
Last edited:
Bigdog said:
Thanks for dong the heavy lifting, Havana. Photon physics are not in my wheelhouse.

When the clouds/gases are warmed up, does that heat transfer directly to the rest of the atmosphere? ... or does it go back to the surface in infrared form? ... or a bit of both?
Click to expand...

It's fairly basic stuff on any university physics or chemistry course.
 
Bigdog said:
Thanks for dong the heavy lifting, Havana. Photon physics are not in my wheelhouse.

When the clouds/gases are warmed up, does that heat transfer directly to the rest of the atmosphere? ... or does it go back to the surface in infrared form? ... or a bit of both?
Click to expand...

The heating effect is mostly generated in the ionosphere, some stays in the ionosphere, some reaches the surface and the result back out to space.
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
No one said the earth is going to end in 12 years idiot!.
Click to expand...
AOC did, to list a single example. Here are her own words, word for word...

"Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?" Ocasio-Cortez told Coates. "This is the war — this is our World War II."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v..._years_if_we_dont_address_climate_change.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...casio-cortez-climate-change-alarm/2642481002/

Adolf_Twitler said:
You are a boldface liar!
Click to expand...
Inversion Fallacy.
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
Did Rush Limbaugh give you that quote? Fox News? Breitbart?

Give us a break douche bag!
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter who is spreading the quote; all that matters is that those were her very own words word for word. SHE is the source of those words.

I also linked you to a USA Today article if that secondary source is more preferable to you... The primary source is still AOC's gigantic horse mouth...
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
DUDE! Use something other than a lying RIGHT-WING FAKE-NEWS website to get your quotes? OK!

Otherwise people are just going to laugh at you and ignore you for being such a vulnerable complicit idiot!
Click to expand...

I gave you a USA Today link you buffoon... Are THEY "right wing fake-news" too?? :laugh: :laugh:

Regardless, all that matters is that those words came directly out of AOC's mouth...
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
I could be belive what they quote as true.

However even if she did say it, she is a freshman congressman lady and rookies are subject to gaffs!

Donald Trump gaffs every time he says climate change is a hoax! And he is the president.

The earth is warming, and climate change is not a hoax- regardless as to whether man is causing it- or not!

So Donald Trump is an idiot for saying it's a hoax!
Click to expand...

Yeah, but he's a "freshman president" much like AOC is a "freshman congressman lady"... Why does she get a free pass and not Trump? After all, "rookies are subject to gaffes", are they not?

It's sad when I don't even have to form any arguments of my own and can just use your own argumentation against you...
 
Havana Moon said:
Although methane is a far more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, around 20 times, it is also has a much shorter retention time in the atmosphere of around 10 years.
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as a greenhouse gas.

Post #174 beautifully explained why this is...
 
gfm7175 said:
Yeah, but he's a "freshman president" much like AOC is a "freshman congressman lady"... Why does she get a free pass and not Trump? After all, "rookies are subject to gaffes", are they not?

It's sad when I don't even have to form any arguments of my own and can just use your own argumentation against you...
Click to expand...

OK! Let's do make a comparison based on number of gaffs! President Trump is leading AOC 10,000 gaffs to AOC's one!

Get real! Idiot!
 
gfm7175 said:
Yeah, but he's a "freshman president" much like AOC is a "freshman congressman lady"... Why does she get a free pass and not Trump? After all, "rookies are subject to gaffes", are they not?

It's sad when I don't even have to form any arguments of my own and can just use your own argumentation against you...
Click to expand...

I answered that dodo bird!
 
gfm7175 said:
It doesn't matter who is spreading the quote; all that matters is that those were her very own words word for word. SHE is the source of those words.

I also linked you to a USA Today article if that secondary source is more preferable to you... The primary source is still AOC's gigantic horse mouth...
Click to expand...

The primary source for gaffs is a gigantic HORSE'S ASS DONALD TRUMP!
 
Bigdog said:
1. What else would you call a system of climates? weather?
Click to expand...
Climate is not a system. It is not weather either. It is a descriptive term, like 'desert climate'. It matters not whether a desert becomes a rainforest, 'desert climate' still means the same thing. Climate does not change. Earth has many climates, there is no global climate. This buzzword was created to mask the other buzzword that people were no longer accepting as well, 'global warming', also undefined.

Weather is simply that: weather. The study of weather patterns and their cause is what meteorology is all about. Some of it is science, some of it is not.

Bigdog said:
2. Terminology problem, not theoretical ... ok
Click to expand...
This particular buzzword is a favorite of the Church of Global Warming, trying to argue that visible light is 'shortwave' (it isn't), and infrared light is 'longwave' (it isn't). It is their attempt to say two things which are egregiously wrong:
1) the Sun only puts out visible light (it puts out a wide spectrum of light, ranging from radio waves all the way up to X rays. The bulk of the Sun's output is infrared.
2) that visible light absorption results in conversion to thermal energy (it doesn't. It results conversion to chemical energy, which has no temperature).
Bigdog said:
3. If there are more "greenhouse" gases. Then YES, there is a change.
Click to expand...
No, there is no such thing as a 'greenhouse' gas. No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth using infrared light emitted from the surface of the Earth.
Bigdog said:
4. With an increase in "greenhouse" gases, it warms more.
Click to expand...
* You can't create energy out of nothing. (1st law of thermodynamics)
* You can't warm a warmer surface using a colder gas. (2nd law of thermodynamics)
* You can't trap light. (Planck's law)
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time. (Stefan-Boltzmann law)
Bigdog said:
5. I think you are conflating surface and atmosphere.
Click to expand...
No. The Church of Global Warming does when they are attempting to move goalposts around.
Bigdog said:
This is new to me ... "No molecule is capable of absorbing a photon of less energy than the molecule already contains."
Click to expand...
Part of quantum physics, which most people don't know. A molecule carries a certain amount of energy. So does a photon. If the photon has more energy than the molecule, the molecule might absorb it. If it has less, no chance of it. The molecule appears reflective or transparent to the photon.

Kind of like trying to stop an incoming truck with a BB gun. The BB's just bounce off.
 
Havana Moon said:
Light from the Sun excites electrons in atoms. So how do photons get converted to heat? Atoms are constantly vibrating, some of them vibrate sufficiently that their vibrational energy is roughly equal to the photons absorbed from the Sun, such that they are in resonance with the solar energy. Those atoms then make a quantum transition from 'electronically excited' to 'vibrationally excited,' meaning that the energy causes the whole atom to move, in other words to heat up. The atoms which make the jump to vibrational excitation soon collide into neighbouring atoms, thus dissipating their vibrational energy causing them to heat up likewise.

Microwave ovens are tuned to the frequency that causes molecules of water to rotate, and the ensuing frictionb8 causes heating of water-containing substances. This is how microwave ovens cook food by heating water molecules and how greenhouse gases adsorb electromagnetic energy and convert it to heat energy.

View attachment 11645

View attachment 11646
Click to expand...

And if a molecule is already so excited, it will not be further excited again by a photon that has less energy than that molecule. You left that rather important part out.
 
Bigdog said:
Thanks for dong the heavy lifting, Havana. Photon physics are not in my wheelhouse.

When the clouds/gases are warmed up, does that heat transfer directly to the rest of the atmosphere? ... or does it go back to the surface in infrared form? ... or a bit of both?
Click to expand...

* You can't warm a warmer surface using a colder gas. (2nd law of thermodynamics)
 
Havana Moon said:
The heating effect is mostly generated in the ionosphere, some stays in the ionosphere, some reaches the surface and the result back out to space.
Click to expand...

* You cannot heat a warmer surface using a colder gas. You cannot make heat flow backwards or reduce entropy in any system. (2nd law of thermodynamics)
 
Darth Omar said:
Why is the dark side of the Moon so cold lol?
Click to expand...

It isn't. Currently, the moon is half full (waxing phase). Half the 'dark side' is lit by the Sun right now.

Like the ISS, the Moon reaches temperatures of 250 deg F during the day (or sunlit side of the station). There is no appreciable atmosphere, no carbon dioxide.
Here on Earth, we have an atmosphere and carbon dioxide, yet daytime temperatures on Earth never get that high (thankfully!) If CO2 warms the Earth, why is the Earth so much COLDER during the day?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top