(PeterBP) wrote:

Whata Fool wrote:

(PeterBP) wrote:

Bill Ward wrote:
....
Now that's more like it. I'd quibble that a lot of the outbound IR is
"black body" radiated from the cloud tops, since that's not dependent on
emission bands, but who's counting?

So this is what you meant by effective blackbody altitude. But what
consistent definition so you have to assume one such exists? And what is
the definition of it, exactly?

Peter, water, and clouds are drops of water (not water vapor),
water radiates _broadband_ (meaning at ALL possible wavelengths), so
clouds not only cool in daytime by blocking sunlight, but also radiate
to space more because of their altitude and ability to radiate broadband.

Thank you Fool, I know that.



Just imagine, this IR radiation, invisible to the human eye,
radiates to space as much thermal energy that makes into the Earth's
biosphere.

I think that is amazing, the talk should be about cooling
radiation to space, not some concept of warming.

If you seek to destroy the debate, yes, that is certainly one way to do
it.


What debate, it has been decided, we are all gonna die.

Run for your life,

or buy a life preserver.

(PeterBP) wrote:

Whata Fool wrote:

(PeterBP) wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:

"PeterBP" wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that if the atmosphere were composed solely o
f
diatomic species like N2 and O2 plus water vapor, that the planet would
be
an iceball?

And it was, back in the 'Varangian...

Eh?

http://www.wordlookup.net/va/varangian-glaciation.html

There are glaciers on all continents today, so unless it can
be shown that there were glaciers on all continents at sea level
at the time, it is no big deal.

The glaciers on all continents today are a drop in the bucked compared
to both an ice age ala the last ones we know of, and the hypothetical
extent of the Varangian Glaciation. So yes, it is a damn big deal.


Most areas of the world were sea bottom at one time or another,
and most areas were at various elevations, land masses rise and fall
over geologic time scales.

But the Global Warming we are observing today has not happened over a
geologic time scale it has happened in the space of a few human
generations.

Nope, the record high for the date is 94 (1937 & 1895, and it won't
make it up to 84 today, where is the warming?

kT wrote:

On Jun 1, 8:23 am, (PeterBP) wrote:
Whata Fool wrote:
(PeterBP) wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:

"PeterBP" wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that if the atmosphere were composed solely o
f
diatomic species like N2 and O2 plus water vapor, that the planet would
be
an iceball?

And it was, back in the 'Varangian...

Eh?

http://www.wordlookup.net/va/varangian-glaciation.html

There are glaciers on all continents today, so unless it can
be shown that there were glaciers on all continents at sea level
at the time, it is no big deal.

The glaciers on all continents today are a drop in the bucked compared
to both an ice age ala the last ones we know of, and the hypothetical
extent of the Varangian Glaciation. So yes, it is a damn big deal.

Can you quantify that for us, in units of dropeons and bigdealeons?

He must be just repeating some of the gossip going around,
here is a link that purports to show the extent of the ice sheets
18,000 years ago.

Note no sheet on Illinois, it did slide down though, but didn't
form there. If the ice did cover the North Atlantic, that is
pretty spectacular (I wonder how they would know that).

http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm

Whata Fool wrote:

kT wrote:

On Jun 1, 8:23 am, (PeterBP) wrote:
Whata Fool wrote:
(PeterBP) wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:

"PeterBP" wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that if the atmosphere were composed sol
ely o
f
diatomic species like N2 and O2 plus water vapor, that the planet w
ould
be
an iceball?

And it was, back in the 'Varangian...

Eh?

http://www.wordlookup.net/va/varangian-glaciation.html

There are glaciers on all continents today, so unless it can
be shown that there were glaciers on all continents at sea level
at the time, it is no big deal.

The glaciers on all continents today are a drop in the bucked compared
to both an ice age ala the last ones we know of, and the hypothetical
extent of the Varangian Glaciation. So yes, it is a damn big deal.

Can you quantify that for us, in units of dropeons and bigdealeons?

He must be just repeating some of the gossip going around,
here is a link that purports to show the extent of the ice sheets
18,000 years ago.

Note no sheet on Illinois, it did slide down though, but didn't
form there. If the ice did cover the North Atlantic, that is
pretty spectacular (I wonder how they would know that).

http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm

OK, smart guy, tell us what the combined surface area and volume of
todays glaciers are compared to the estimated ditto of the last 3 ice
ages.

We are waiting.

--
regards , Peter B. P. http://macplanet.dk
Washington D.C.: District of Criminals

"I dont drink anymore... of course, i don't drink any less, either!

Bill Ward wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 15:23:31 +0200, PeterBP wrote:

Bill Ward wrote:

It would be great if there could be a rational discussion of
the cooling process of the Earth, but a lot of people are fixated
on IR radiation from the surface, and the part that doesn't escape
to space.
Obviously if all the atmosphere that contains water vapor or
the trace GHGs radiates IR, some of that radiation escapes to
space.
The radiation from the surface is only a small part of the IR
radiation processes, the major part of the IR radiation processes
has to be the part that escapes to space, simply because it must
equal the energy absorbed from the sun.
And this amount of IR radiation is spectacular, being
invisible
electromagentic radiation that equals solar energy at all
wavelengths, and moreso when realizing that energy flux is a
function of frequency.

Now that's more like it. I'd quibble that a lot of the outbound IR
is "black body" radiated from the cloud tops, since that's not
dependent on emission bands, but who's counting?

So this is what you meant by effective blackbody altitude. But what
consistent definition so you have to assume one such exists? And what
is the definition of it, exactly?

Google is your friend. This is "really basic stuff", remember? So I'm
not spoon-feeding you.

"Answering in the assertive when challenged" is not "spoon-feeding", Mr.
Ward. It is standing up to some very simple rules of debate, which is to
put up when you make a claim.

No comment on this...


Again, be so kind to let us know why you have distorted the debate from
radiation vs convection to this adhom sillyness. I have my ide as to why,
but I'm giving you a chance to show that you are actually here to debate
science, and not to destroy debate.

Please specify exactly where you think I've engaged in "ad hom". I try
hard not to do that, even when sorely tempted.

And as much as I'm sorely tempted to reply to your trolling attempts, I
won't.


You may also want to demonstrate your implicit claim that convection is
a more important means of transporting heat away from Earth's surface
than radiation.

No comment on this, either.



Thanks for your response. Maybe "PeterBP" will learn something from
this.

Sounds like someone has an axe to grind. Have I humiliated you
sometime in the past?

You? I seriously doubt it. Want to learn enough to give it a try?

How old were you again?

I notice you do not answer the questions put forth at all, but merely
troll. Nevermind; Killfiled.


--
regards , Peter B. P. http://macplanet.dk
Washington D.C.: District of Criminals

"I dont drink anymore... of course, i don't drink any less, either!

(PeterBP) wrote:

Whata Fool wrote:

kT wrote:

On Jun 1, 8:23 am, (PeterBP) wrote:
Whata Fool wrote:
(PeterBP) wrote:

Dan Luke wrote:

"PeterBP" wrote:

You do realize, don't you, that if the atmosphere were composed sol
ely o
f
diatomic species like N2 and O2 plus water vapor, that the planet w
ould
be
an iceball?

And it was, back in the 'Varangian...

Eh?

http://www.wordlookup.net/va/varangian-glaciation.html

There are glaciers on all continents today, so unless it can
be shown that there were glaciers on all continents at sea level
at the time, it is no big deal.

The glaciers on all continents today are a drop in the bucked compared
to both an ice age ala the last ones we know of, and the hypothetical
extent of the Varangian Glaciation. So yes, it is a damn big deal.

Can you quantify that for us, in units of dropeons and bigdealeons?

He must be just repeating some of the gossip going around,
here is a link that purports to show the extent of the ice sheets
18,000 years ago.

Note no sheet on Illinois, it did slide down though, but didn't
form there. If the ice did cover the North Atlantic, that is
pretty spectacular (I wonder how they would know that).

http://www.scotese.com/lastice.htm

OK, smart guy, tell us what the combined surface area and volume of
todays glaciers are compared to the estimated ditto of the last 3 ice
ages.

We are waiting.


I don't even want to talk about ice ages, the insanity of
a snowball Earth 600 million years go with the single original
continent breaking apart less than 300 million years ago is
too confused to discuss.


Has there been time for 3 ice ages while there has been
more than one continent?

"Whata Fool" wrote
What debate, it has been decided, we are all gonna die.
Run for your life,

You can run as far as you want MORON, but you will still not leave the
earth.

The only way YOU are leaving is through death. And the death of fools
never comes too early for me.