What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

1G12

Active member
Detailed Explanation of How the Atmosphere Works

Detailed Explanation of How the Atmosphere Works

To go along with the previous post...
Sorry this is a bit long but, necessarily so...



Each part of the Earth’s surface emits heat in the form of infrared (IR) radiation. The peak of this emission is right at the frequency where CO2 absorbs strongly. While the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere is small, 410 parts per million or 0.041%, this is still a large number of molecules, large enough that near the surface, at wavelengths where CO2 absorbs, the average distance light will travel before being captured is a few meters (a couple of yards).
Greenhouse gases, as well as absorbing IR radiation, emit it. Almost none of the greenhouse gas molecules that absorb IR light emit it immediately. Instead the internal excited energy of the molecule is transformed into thermal motion of
molecules nearby through collisions. This takes about a microsecond, a millionth of a second and is roughly a million times more likely than the molecule directly emitting IR light.
In the same way unexcited greenhouse gas molecules can be excited by collisions into a state where they can emit. It turns out that the rate at which excited molecules can form increases with temperature.
The distance that the emitted radiation can travel is short near the surface, but increases as one climbs through the atmosphere because density, pressure and temperature decrease as we climb. Each of these lengthens the distance radiation emitted from a molecule travels before being absorbed, until about at 10 km altitude where the temperature is -50 C (or ~-60 F or~220 K) and the density has decreased by a factor of ~3, it becomes possible for radiation from CO2 molecules to reach space, carrying thermal energy away from the Earth. Below that level, energy emitted by a CO2 molecule is soon absorbed by another relatively nearby one. Thus this energy simply cannot be radiated to space to balance the incoming solar energy.
Taken together this means that the doorway to space is very narrow at wavelengths where CO2 can absorb. Since the same amount of energy has to be radiated to space as is coming from the sun, something has to increase, and that is the temperature of the surface. As the surface warms, the rate at which it can radiate energy increases, pushing more thermal IR radiation out into space in spectral regions where ghg molecules don’t absorb.
If we increase the proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere, the altitude at which energy can be radiated to space rises also, but since this higher level is colder and the pressure and density are lower, the doorway becomes narrower, and the surface has to warm more in order to shove the same amount of energy out and restore the balance with the incoming energy carried by the sunlight.

Figures can be seen at*https://rabett.blogspot.com/2010/03/simplest-explanation.html
 
Last edited:

Koondense

Well-known member
Veteran
Yeah, would be nice if the trolls took some time to read since we took too much time to read their trolling...
It's always great to read reasonable sentences once in a while :)


Cheers
 

1G12

Active member
All anyone has to do is look up ''International Standard Atmosphere and see the values these peoples' church comes up with,

vs the real temperature values when the temperature is properly calculated.

They calculate the temperature of the planet wrong and come up 33 degrees short.

_____________________________________________________


From Wikipedia:

The International Standard Atmosphere models a hypothetical standard day to allow a reproducible engineering reference for calculation and testing of engine and vehicle performance at various altitudes. It does not provide a rigorous meteorological model of actual atmospheric conditions (for example, changes in barometric pressure due to wind conditions). Neither does it account for humidity effects; air is assumed to be dry and clean and of constant composition.


This is just an engineering tool. How much more full of it can this guy possibly be? :moon:
 
I

Ignignokt

What the hell is he going on about 'you peoples church'??

Have you all stated your religion if any at all?
 

1G12

Active member
oh boy...so .041% overrides the 99.0%?
OK.
you can have your echo chamber back.

It's not the percent of CO2 in relation to the other atmospheric gasses, it's the total amount of CO2 that's important. That's how the physics works. As stated, it's still a huge number of molecules.
 

kickarse

Active member
Love the ink in the water, it is science for little kiddie's or loony lefty's

I'll ask again, has any of their (IPCC, Al Gore any other flog) predictions came anywhere near true
 

1G12

Active member
Love the ink in the water, it is science for little kiddie's or loony lefty's

I'll ask again, has any of their (IPCC, Al Gore any other flog) predictions came anywhere near true

Sea-level rise is accelerating faster than the IPCC predicted. Actual sea-level rise is 80% higher than the median IPCC projection. By 2100 sea-level rise was predicted by the IPCC to be in the range of 18-59 cm. It is now believed that figure may be far too low, because estimates of contributions from Greenland and Antarctic ice-caps were excluded from AR4 because the data was not considered reliable. (This omission hardly supports the notion that the IPCC seeks to exaggerate global warming trends).


Each Arctic summer, sea-ice is melting faster than average predictions in the last IPCC report. The Arctic is experiencing a long-term loss of multi-year ice which is also accelerating.


Recent research has shown that we are experiencing hurricanes with higher wind speeds, and these storms will be more destructive, last longer and make landfall more frequently than in the past. Because this phenomenon is strongly associated with sea surface temperatures, it is reasonable to suggest a strong probability that the increase in storm intensity and climate change are linked since ocean temperatures have increased. Just look at this year and the last.

IPCC projections often tend to be too conservative due to the fact that there are so many scientists working together on their reports and they have to reach a consensus on what they publish.
 

Yamaha FG-840

Active member
Your fake link is just that: FAKE. There's only one chart on this planet that assigns both

Atmospheric Air

and

Carbon Dioxide

their average internal energy for MATH and PHYSICS.

The chart is named ''The Chart of Specific Heats of Gases,

and it's most important component is a SUB-CHART,

named ''Chart of Gas Energy Constants'' represented in

all mathematics

related to Atmospheric gases.

Here's a great demonstration of CO2 concentration.........hopefully this link will work. lol

https://youtu.be/81FHVrXgzuA

That chart

names CARBON DIOXIDE
and
names ATMOSPHERIC AIR

SPECIFICALLY:
ASSIGNING CO2 the LOWER "R", or
ENERGY CONSTANT.

Specifically assigning ATMOSPHERIC AIR,
the HIGHER ''R'' or
Energy Constant.

The chart:

https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/specific-heat-capacity-gases-d_159.html

The innumerate, illiterate clown in that video tried to make it sound like CO2 heats the planet by acting as a substance having a HIGHER heat capacity: black dye.

Crass, SHAMELESS inversion of the very physical laws that make black dye heat water, and make carbon dioxide, cool air: it's right there in the chart of the law for calculating the temperatures

of Air vs Carbon Dioxide.

NASA'S own planetary energy budget page admits fully - there are gases cooling the planet by 29%.

That page is here, halfway down:

"About 29 percent of the solar energy that arrives at the top of the atmosphere is reflected back to space by clouds, atmospheric particles, or bright ground surfaces like sea ice and snow. This energy plays no role in Earth’s climate system."

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance

We look around for somewhere to remind us WHICH GASES
are doing that cooling: and we see - Oh! The Green House Gases H20 and CO2 doing the vast majority of the 29% c.o.o.l.i.n.g.

https://goo.gl/qww22m

And then of course you're faced with the fact your story claims the creation of 29% less energy IN,

by CO2 and H20,
makes the planet WARMER than if there were no atmosphere.

A claim which is OF ITSELF crass, OUTRIGHT VIOLATION of thermodynamical law - or statement of fact regarding law - which says that

because radiation is the

slowest and least efficient mechanism of cooling,

radiant-loss ONLY cooling mode, defintionally creates the highest temperature possible for any object warmed with a given quantity of energy.


And lest you keep on deluding yourself that there's some story about how,

''At TaiR AtMuSFeaR izza.. lettin awl that'Tair UTHUR LaigT git THReW, BUT it ain't uh LETTIN thim

devlish far red infur's
git back owt!''

don't delude yourself even THAT crass, "You're so stupid you won't even ever CHECK" in your face fraud
is true.

Objects glow identically from astrophysical bodies in space in the sense that all their modes of cooling are, ultimately,

vastly predominately,
radiant.

Definitionally radiant cooling leaves an object at it's highest possible temperature for the energy warming it - all astrophysical objects - particularly simple objects such as stars and planets as individuals,

radiate their glowed-off energy on what's called a bell curve.


https://goo.gl/6YSqBL <-----those are the emissions spectra of the sun, vs the emissions spectra of Earth. It's no secret either.

These signature curves are seen all through radiation mechanics because any object will hold more energy per a given temperature,

than when conduction, or convection - the active conduction cooling acceleration of conduction by fluids - are present.

So that statement ALONE - that ANY cold fluids leave an object warmer than if the cold bath didn't exist - is UTTER violation of radiant energy law.

Not to MENTION the fact that the statement also swears this violation is created by mechanisms causing MORE ENERGY to leak out of the PLANET by *each time it makes LESS LEAK IN.*

These fakes' story is that with current GHG levels being at 25,000/H2O & 410ish/CO2 ppm average - current losses of energy to the planet are at 29%

and that if ever more reflecting gases appear,
causing ever less energy to reach & warm the planet,

this will cause thermal sensors to detect and depict ever more energy leaking back out.

More of the gases not letting the energy reach and warm the planet
are going to cause more energy to leak back out of the planet,
by making less energy leak into it.

Til the cold nitrogen bath making 29% less energy leak into the planet, is making more than 100% leak back out of the planet.

Double violations of thermodynamics in one single statement of cause and effect, by the people telling you

they're too stupid to calculate the temperature of the planet correctly, coming up 33 degrees short,

but the entire world is dumb for not knowing a magical gassiness makes more than 100% of available energy leak out of a rock

by making 29% less light leak into it. Transparent crass, fraud.

Note the temperature arrived at by people ACTUALLY calculating the temperature of the planet in this film for beginning pilots,

who have to be taught the REAL temperature of the Atmosphere because it's a critical part of their not crashing their aircraft: 288 K.

https://youtu.be/qvEXenB8btI?t=998

D'oH!!

The Church of the Magical Gaissiness resolves the temperature of the planet at 255 kelvin.

They can't even calculate Earth's temperature and neither can they for Venus, coming up several hundred degrees short there, too.

Since we sent and landed the 13 Venera craft there your church leaders despise the flight people at NASA.

Because the flight people are the ones who journaled the fact the Magical Gassiness Church at NASA GISS are purest, transparent frauds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera#Scientific_findings

WoW who swiped the physics world's GROUND BREAKING discoveries on Venus?

It's you peoples' church you tell us where the information is about the magical gassiness making the laws of physics different on Venus so it's several hundred degrees warmer than physics law predicts.

Oh that's right the planet surface is EXACTLY what the standard equations we flew there and landed with, predicted.

That's yet another of you peoples' crass and open frauds on the scientific community, the claim temperatures are unusual on Venus.

Every single word of it's crass, transparent, obvious fraud.

Which is why the only people who'll try to debate it's not, can't even name the law of thermodynamics governing gas temperatures.

The chart of that law

formally forbids addition of CO2 to Air, warming it.

Part II of that law the Chart of Specific Heats of Gases, with it's sub chart derivative of those values, the chart for Gas Constants,

formally names CO2 and Air assigning CO2 the LOWER Energy Constant.

Assigning CO2 the lower ''R'' means addition of CO2 into any particular volume of air LOWERS it's temperature: not raises it.

And the equation of the law - the one we see everyone using regarding the Standard Atmospheric Equations - is the part the Church of The Magical Gaissiness

SKIPS - so it's resolution of Earth planetary temperature comes out 255K not 288K.

That's the reason they never discuss the actual laws of resolution of gas volume temperatures with you: they violate not just the general temperature resolution process

by skipping the part where the Equation of the law, ACCOUNTS for the COMPRESSION COMPONENT of ''COMPRESSIBLE PHASE MATTER-ENERGY relationships -

they also TRASH usage of the CHART
for determination of whether addition of CO2 to Air, warms or cools it.

That's all on top of telling you a cold nitrogen bath making 29% less light warm a rock makes the rock leak back out more than 100% of available energy.
 
Last edited:

1G12

Active member
Oh gawd.........our troll is back posting here again...and even after we proved so clearly that he is a chronic liar, delusional & doesn't even understand atmospheric physics.

Here's a link for ya to the Univ. of Chicago so you may learn about how our atmosphere works.
https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/PrinciplesPlanetaryClimate/


Seems like a rather pointless waste of anyone's time to argue on the internet with someone who most certainly is dealing with mental health issues.

Please follow the link and find some services in your area.....PLEASE
https://www.aha.org/2011-02-07-national-mental-health-organizations

Best of luck!
 

St. Phatty

Active member
Seems like a rather pointless waste of anyone's time to argue on the internet with someone who most certainly is dealing with mental health issues.

You say that like it's a bad thing !

Just kidding, our resident trolls have me fumbling around looking for the Ignore button.
 

trichrider

Kiss My Ring
Veteran
Oh gawd.........our troll is back posting here again...and even after we proved so clearly that he is a chronic liar, delusional & doesn't even understand atmospheric physics.

Here's a link for ya to the Univ. of Chicago so you may learn about how our atmosphere works.
https://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/PrinciplesPlanetaryClimate/


Seems like a rather pointless waste of anyone's time to argue on the internet with someone who most certainly is dealing with mental health issues.

Please follow the link and find some services in your area.....PLEASE
https://www.aha.org/2011-02-07-national-mental-health-organizations

Best of luck!
he ate your lunch.
twit:moon:
 

1G12

Active member
he ate your lunch.
twit:moon:

:laughing::laughing::laughing:

As somebody suggested some time back, if you Google some of the words and phrases that YammerHaW uses you will find this person's posts in numerous places...most of the time on actual scientific sites. I swear, in every single case the other people who post & clearly understand science know he doesn't understand atmospheric physics & think he's nuts. Go ahead...check it out. I've run some of his stuff past some science folks just because I wanted to learn want he was on about and if there was anything to it & they said it was gibberish. :moon: back at ya!
 

TychoMonolyth

Boreal Curing
:laughing::laughing::laughing:

As somebody suggested some time back, if you Google some of the words and phrases that YammerHaW uses you will find this person's posts in numerous places...most of the time on actual scientific sites. I swear, in every single case the other people who post & clearly understand science know he doesn't understand atmospheric physics & think he's nuts. Go ahead...check it out. I've run some of his stuff past some science folks just because I wanted to learn want he was on about and if there was anything to it & they said it was gibberish. :moon: back at ya!

He told me he learned the science in his parent's Labs. I think he meant Basements.
 

igrowone

Well-known member
Veteran
september - the global temperatures

september - the global temperatures

i got a hankering for some data
the latest global temps, interesting as always
it was warm, which is becoming usual

September


September 2018 Blended Land and Sea Surface
Temperature Anomalies in degrees Celsius


September 2018 Blended Land and Sea Surface
Temperature Percentiles

During September 2018, much of the global land and ocean surfaces had warmer- to much-warmer-than-average conditions. The most notable warm temperatures were present across southern South America, Alaska, the southwestern and eastern contiguous U.S., much of Europe, the Middle East, as well as western and eastern Russia, where temperature departures from average were +2.0 (+3.6°F) or higher. Record warm temperatures were present across parts of western Alaska and its surrounding ocean, Far East Russia, the Barents Sea, as well as across parts of the Atlantic Ocean, southern South America, western Indian Ocean, Europe, and the Middle East. Cooler-than-average conditions were present across much of Canada, Mongolia, northern China, and across parts of eastern Indian Ocean, and the northern Atlantic Ocean (south of Greenland) as well as eastern parts of the Atlantic Ocean. The most notable cool temperature departures from average during September were in central and western Canada, where temperatures were 3.0°C (5.4°F) below average or less. Record cold September temperatures were observed in southwestern Canada.
With global records dating back to 1880, the September 2018 global temperature across the world's land and ocean surfaces was 0.78°C (1.40°F) above the 20th century average of 15.0°C (59.0°F)—tying with 2017 as the fourth highest September temperature in the 139-year record. The ten warmest September global land and ocean surface temperatures have occurred since 2003, with the last five years (2014–2018) comprising the five warmest Septembers on record. September 2015 is the record warmest September at +0.93°C (+1.67°F). September 2018 also marks the 42nd consecutive September and the 405th consecutive month with temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th century average.
The globally-averaged land surface temperature during September 2018 was 1.02°C (1.84°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F) and the sixth highest September global land temperature since global records began in 1880. The ten warmest September global land temperatures have occurred since 2005, with 2016 the record warmest September global land temperature at +1.24°C (+2.23°F). The global oceans had a September temperature that ranked as the fourth highest in the 139-year record at 0.69°C (1.24°F) above the 20th century average of 16.2°C (61.1°F). The ten warmest global ocean September temperatures have occurred since 2003, with the last five years (2014–2018) comprising the five warmest Septembers on record.
According to NCEI's Regional Analysis, four of six continents had a September temperature that ranked among the four warmest Septembers on record, with Europe having its warmest September on record at +2.02°C (+3.64°F). This value surpassed the previous record set in 2016 by more than 0.11°C (0.20°F). September 2018 marks the first time since continental records began that Europe had a September temperature departure that was +2.0°C (+3.6°F) or higher. South America had its second warmest September on record at +1.51°C (+2.72°F), falling behind the record set in 2015 by 0.13°C (0.23°F). Africa and Asia had their third and fourth warmest Septembers, respectively. Meanwhile, North America had its smallest September temperature departure from average for September in 10 years (since 2008) at 0.27°C (0.49°F).
Select national information is highlighted below. Please note that different countries report anomalies with respect to different base periods. The information provided here is based directly upon these data:

  • Argentina had its highest September temperature at 1.8°C (3.2°F) above average, surpassing the previous record set in 1971 and 2012 by 0.1°C (0.2°F). The city of Buenos Aires also had its highest September temperature on record at 17.4°C (63.3°F). This value is 0.8°C (1.4°F) higher than the previous record set in 2007.
  • Warmer-than-average conditions engulfed much of Spain during September 2018, resulting in Spain's warmest September on record with a national mean temperature of 23.0°C (73.4°F) or 2.4°C (4.3°F) above the 1981–2010 average. This value is 0.1°C (0.2°F) above the previous record set in 1987. Spain's national records extend back to 1965.
  • The United Kingdom had cooler-than-average conditions during the month, with a national temperature of 12.4°C (54.3°F) or 0.2°C (0.4°F) below average.
  • France's September 2018 national temperature was 19.0°C (66.2°F), which is 1.7°C (3.1°F) above the 1981–2010 average. September 2018 marks the sixth consecutive month in which France's national temperature has been above 1.0°C (1.8°F).
  • The Kingdom of Bahrain had its second warmest mean September temperature (tied with 1998 and 2015) since national records began in 1902 at 2.1°C (3.8°F) above average. September 2017 is Bahrain's record warm September at 2.2°C (4.0°F). The nation's maximum and minimum temperatures were also the second highest on record at 2.4°C (4.3°F) and 2.8°C (5.0°F) above average, respectively.
ENSO-neutral conditions continued across the tropical Pacific Ocean during September 2018. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, El Niño is favored to develop in the next few months and continue through the Northern Hemisphere winter (Southern Hemisphere summer). This forecast focuses on the ocean surface temperatures between 5°N and 5°S latitude and 170°W to 120°W longitude, called the Niño 3.4 region.
 
Top