Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Derek - Smelling the coffee.
#61
(02-14-2010, 02:43 AM)Richard111 Wrote: By the way, "add" does not comply with the second law of thermodynamics or how radiation occurs between two objects at different temperatures. The word "net" might be more fitting.

Angel
hal-e-lu-ya.

BTW - either silas or his brother,
I'd call him
"silly misconcieved ass", brother or not.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#62
Quote:The problem with AGW idea is that AGWers think that the Earth is isolated and that the heat engine only works on the surface.
They don’t take into account that heat incoming from the Sun is transferred by conduction from the surface to the subsurface layers,
where it is stored until the sun declines and the incidence of direct solar radiation disappears, this is, during nighttime.

During nighttime, the heat stored in the subsurface is transferred by conduction towards the surface,which is colder than the materials not exposed at the surface of the ground.The heat transferred from the subsurface layers to the surface is then taken by the air through convection and it warms up.

This very fact is known to architects who designs passive solar homes,using certain materials that absorb sunlight,thus warming it up.Usually in a large sun room with mass stone floors and walls that can "store" some of the absorbed sunlight it received during the day that will radiate back into the rooms air during the night to help keep the home warm.

This has been known for decades already.I knew about it in the early 1980's when I bought a book on Passive Solar Heated homes.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#63
Yes, the earths surface is a grey body, or at least a black body with a core.
During the day heat goes down from the surface, and at night heat comes back up to the surface.
It is the main idea of my water planet plot.

If G/house / IR budgets / AGW had to try to work out the amounts of radiation movements,
from the proper perspective of relative to the absorber,
AND heat movements down from the surface (day), and back upto the surface (night),
they simply can not do it. It is too complicated.
(also geothermal inputs)
Has anyone ever seen an IR budget worked out relatively. ?

I wonder if they are too embarressed to admit their knowledge is so very limited.
They hide behind the greenhouse effect "theory" with no generally agreed way in which it works,
as well as added IR budgets (that should be relative) and
the creationalist AGW unproven modelling and hypothesis.

It would be so much more productive if they just admitted they have being covering up
their ignorance and in many cases their deliberate, willful misdirection for years.
But then they wouldn't likely get any more "research" grants. The irony is they soon will not anyway.
They will get no sympathy from me at all, they deserve that, and much more,
such as loss of freedom, commonly called jailed for fraud.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#64
I have a currently barren front yard I have to finish this spring,and that means planting grass seed.

However the SUBsurface soil is too cold to even plant yet,even if it is warm on the surface.That vanishes quickly in the early spring due to convection from the surface and from the nighttime,when there is no surface heating going on.

I have to wait another month before I even consider casting the seeds and lightly rake it in.In the meantime it has been too rainy and cool to bother even raking the soil,and that means the soil is too cool to do anything with it.

Too many climatologists lack any background in agronomy to realize that there are different soil horizons to consider,that can effect temperature conductivity to the surface.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#65
I'm OK, I used to be a gravedigger. Big Grin
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#66
I once taught US Marines intelligence.

Guess that pretty much disqualifies me for just about anything now, doesn't it?

Smile
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!


Reply
#67
Derek,

this is Dr.Miskolczi answering questions in this article:

Former NASA scientist defends theory refuting global warming doctrine

There has been ZERO published papers challenging his conclusions.

Global Warming via the AGW hypothesis can not be possible with his conclusion as shown in his science paper.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#68
Now, that needs wider dissemination.

[Image: cheers2qu2.gif]
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!


Reply
#69
(02-14-2010, 03:35 PM)JohnWho Wrote: Now, that needs wider dissemination.

[Image: cheers2qu2.gif]

I will soon put it in the blog.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#70
Re the SUBsurface discussion above; If I may add my personal observation.
I have mentioned before my time in the Namibian Desert. Not having much to do I tried to take up astronomy. This involved walking out into the sand dunes at night until the station lights were hidden. Having only binoculars I found lying down the most comfortable way to observe the heavens.

During the day the sand would be far to hot to walk on with bare feet, never mind lie on wearing just a pair of shorts. Yet by 10:00pm or so it was bearable but still a bit warm. What I found was that if I scooped a body shaped hole in the sand about three inches or so deep, the sand was COOL.

After a couple of hours comfortable observation I would have to return to base because I was shivering with cold. (all relative, air temp was probably still above 20C)

This supports the claims I have read that deserts radiate humungous levels of long wave IR out to space (very clear skies). Thus the land surface does NOT store a lot of heat, but it does create a lot of hot air by conduction and convection which supports the Hadley cell global air movement cycle. The desert air tends to be a bit short on water vapour but you will usually find some dew around dawn. This early morning dew supports a whole lot of life in the supposedly barren desert. These same deserts have been around, mostly unchanged, for a few thousand years or so. GHGs have nothing whatsoever to do with their creation. It is a geological thing. The ocean is the world's hot water bottle.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
#71
I basically agree with you Richard111, hence my plot, but deserts are one example, there are many different ones, as I know you are aware,
with differing albedo, absorbsion, emission and conduction rates.
Overall I would suggest than the land (and plants) does store some heat during the day, and radiate it at night.
I happen to think the oceans must do a lot more than the land, in which I think we agree.

Also it does not take much depth in a mine to notice the temperature rising virtually anywhere on the planet.
This geothermal heat (remembering the earth's core is [supposedly] 8 times hotter than the sun) release, or heat flow
is presumably a global "constant" with rather dramatic localised concentrations we see as volcanic activity.
Especially where this heat flow is put into the oceans (and remembering the ocean depths are far colder than the global average air temperature),
it is surely too large an input to ignore in radiation budgets, but ignore it they do.
Even Miskolczi admits to ignoring it.

I suppose if the IR budgets are so wildly exaggerated by addition rather than relative flows,
then the geothermal inputs are so small as to be ignored....
Which says more about the IR budgets than it does about geothermal heat inputs...

SST - re Miskolczi link, I will have a read, thank you.
(keeping a distinct eye out for if it is treated relatively or cumulatively)
Later edit - Yup, he does not challenge the addition basis of IR budgets..
So, I commented on the thread as follows,
" Dr. Miskolczi had to leave NASA to get his works published.
James Hansen stopped publication whilst Dr. Mikolczi was employed by Nasa.

I have no doubt that Dr. Miskolczi has discovered, and shown
a relationship between atmospheric water vapour and CO2.

BUT - He still adds up radiation cumulatively, not relatively..

Overall he saya the only way to warm or cool the world is by
changing the solar input, or the planets albedo.
This is fair enough, but, he ignores geothermal inputs.

Overall - Dr. Miskolczi, interesting observations re H2O and CO2,
but quack, quack ooops, regarding IR (addition) budgets.
Greenhouse theory, AGW, and IR budgets are quack,
but simply because they add radiation (cumulative),
they should be relative - period.
"

To illustrate the point I am trying to make more clearly regarding addition in IR budgets,
this example I came up and used at WUWT with may help.
http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/fo...d-517.html

" object a) emitting at 50 w/m2
and,
object b) emitting at 100 w/m2

Object a) emits (minus) 50, and recieves (adds) 100 = net gain of +50.
ie, -50+100=+50

Object b) emits (minus) 100, and recieves (adds) 50 = net loss of -50
ie, -100+50=-50

IF there were a third object at absolute zero inbetween,
then it might just recieve,
object a) (adds) 50, and object b) (adds) 100 = net gain of +150.
ie, +50+100=+150
But there ain’t an “object c)”, so that is ridiculous..
"

It might help to imagine objects a) and b) in your mind as,
a) yourself, b) a gas fire on full
or,
a) atmosphere b) earths surface.

It should become immediately apparent there is no " object c) ".
Never the less the object c) figure is the figure used in all
IR budgets, G/house effect, and AGW modelling / unproven hypothesis "explanations".


Without the object c) there are no IR budgets as presently imagined / portrayed,
so niether is there a greenhouse effect, or, any possible basis for AGW. - period.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#72
Derek, these "global" heat budgets, why are there so many, and all different, depending on the agenda of the author?

This is the only one I am attempting to study as the author admits there is still much to learn about the atmosphere. This is a 19 page, text only, pdf file. No graphics at all.

WATER AND THE EARTH’S HEAT BUDGETS

This business about heat from the earth's core not appearing in the budgets, I feel there must be some impact, especially as I have mentioned before, at the mid-ocean ridges. I suspect huge quantities of CO2 enter the water under pressure, plus a lot of heat.

One point I can confirm. My brother-in-law was a section manager at Vaal Reefs gold mine in South Africa and he took me down one of the deepest shafts. I can confirm it was damn HOT down there. How that heat gets to the surface under normal conditions I do not know.

Either way, I do not think this subteranean heat is much of a global climate driver, just a continuous background effect, and it should be included in the budgets if it has any effect at all.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
#73
I have sat back on this personally,because of the many contradictory explanations that never makes sense to me.Since at this time I simply do not have the time and energy to contribute much beyond posting links,I will wait a while until I can make sense of it all.

I really appreciate what you guys are doing trying to put your thoughts down on this,since it is a time consuming thing to make sense of the mess.In time we will get a lot wiser for it and hope this thread continues for a long while.

That is why I pushed Alan Siddons and Michael Hammer,because they appear to have a better handle on it.Here is one more link for you guys to ponder over:

Greenhouse Gas Facts and Fantasies
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#74
Thanks SST, it is really appreciated, AND
thanks for providing somewhere where we can talk things over without being denigrated or haranged.

It really is not possible much anywhere else on the internet I'm aware of,
even where supposedly far better than us frequent,
so long will we continue here.

I hope others of similar open and curious mind feel invited to join in, because you are.
It does not matter if what is said is wrong, right, or only partially correct, as long as it is constructive.
We will not get to any right answer straight away, we must do the blind and false alleys first.
That said I think we have a good start so far, and I have, as have others here already have,
will admit if at a later point it becomes realised anything previously said was wrong, or not completely right, or agreed with.
What matters is the attitude, not that what is said is perfectly correct,
because none is at present, and even if it were, we would not know it was.

What a fantastically interesting time to be interested in climate...
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#75
Idea
http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/fo...ml#pid3652

Angel
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#76
(02-16-2010, 03:51 AM)Derek Wrote: Idea
http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/fo...ml#pid3652

Angel

Quote:Opinions please.
1) Does the experiment show as described above. ?
2) Is the experiment repeatable, verifiable. ?

I am glad that you allow for the possibility that it could be wrong or needs to be modified.

Good scientists would welcome valid criticisms of a hypothesis,since it advances science research.

Smile
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#77
Derek, interesting experiment you linked to.

This business of plastic being transparent to IR has me worried. I will do some tests with plastic from bottles.
I have a woodburning stove which gives out lovely heat. I find if I hold a sheet of clear plastic between my hand and the stove all sense of heat is lost.

I am still ploughing through Hammer's paper and trying to fully understand why the tropopause is so cold. I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the "greenhouse effect" is limited to some distance quite close to the heat source and the major volume of the atmosphere is shielded from any and all IR bands absorbed by any and all so called "greenhouse" gases.

The constancy of the atmospheric lapse rate seems to confirm that any heating of the atmosphere occurs close to the surface and dwindles away rapidly with altitude. The one "greenhouse gas", water vapour, which can change hour by hour has very lttle effect on local temperatures and any increase is lost quickly when the sun goes down and skies remain clear.
Environmentalism is based on lies and the lies reflect an agenda that regards humanity as the enemy of the Earth. - Alan Caruba
Reply
#78
Thanks SST, should the experiments thread in the science section of the open forum be stickied. ?

I was wondering about the plastic as well Richard111, good spot.
I doubt glass is any better as it blocks IR, so how about rock salt plates made into box shapes.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply
#79
(02-17-2010, 07:30 AM)Derek Wrote: Thanks SST, should the experiments thread in the science section of the open forum be stickied. ?

I was wondering about the plastic as well Richard111, good spot.
I doubt glass is any better as it blocks IR, so how about rock salt plates made into box shapes.

Go ahead and stick it.
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies.

–William O. Douglas, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1952
Reply
#80
Regarding the plastic blocking some of the relevant IR wavelengths Richard111 mentioned.
I had noticed watching the films that some of the bottles did look slightly peculiar shapes.
One side appearing a different (flatter) shape than the other, I assume this is from previous runs of the experiment.

Atmospheres used in the experiment - I would suggest that five atmospheres are needed
(although 3 maybe sufficient, ie, possibly for simplicity discarding 1-2 and 2-2).
I do not think any of the atmospheres need to be over water.
1-1) A pure CO2 with atmospheric water vapour level, 1-2) a pure (dry) CO2,
2-1) Atmospheric CO2 and water vapour, 2-2) Dry atmospheric CO2. 5)and
3) a dry Nitrogen 80% and Oxygen 20% control.

Thermometre location, possible heating by the fire. - If plastic is not good conductor of heat within itself, and
it has absorbed some of the IR on the fires side of the bottle would this imply the following.
The thermometre is probably not directly heated by the fire as much as one might of suspected,
and lends support to the experimentor when he said that he had discarded to any large degree that the thermometre was heated by the fire.

Container to use -
1) If the plastic has absorbed a lot of the IR and then heated the atmosphere within by conduction and lower frquency radiation, then this is not such a bad thing anyway, is it. ?
Maybe it would be better if the fire side of the bottle was painted with a paint of the same albedo as earths. Presumably a dark blue / grey.
Then the inside of the painted section of the bottle would radiate / conduct in a similar manner as earth to the bottles atmosphere.

2) Would a better approach be to use a container made of a front and back that was transparent to the fires IR, ie rock salt plate, and
have sides and a top and bottom made of a material transparent to IR frequecies between 10 to 40 degrees celcius.
This would let the firs IR through the box and only heat the atmosphere as it does directly.
The heat being lost by conduction and (lower0 frequency radiation by the atmospher would be through the sides, top, and bottom.
The thermometre would be best located on one of the sides.

Personally on the above basis I think the first container idea is the better,
as it is nearer the earths surface conduction and radiation and how the (limited) atmosphere dissipates the heat
that the experiment tries to show which constituents effect it, which way, and how much.

The second suggestion may well not be as easily or cheaply done, but is probably a better earths atmosphere similie.

Any thoughts please.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

H. L. Mencken.  

The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)