Climate Change
- Thread starter Addict2sex
- Start date
again you seem very confused about simple concepts such as singular vs. plural
that concept was taught to you in grade school long before you dropped out
you must have that kid who was sitting in the back of the class eating the Elmer's paste glue rather than learning
Clearly you can't have a degree in the sciences.
Definitely not in eng lit, or anything in the humanities or arts.
So its most likely phys ed.
too funny
know many phys ed grads who are able to describe the absorption mechanism of electromagnetic radiation by organic molecules with dipole moments?
you are not very bright
Do I know any chemical engineers with real degrees who think the greenhouse effect isn't real?
There's no way you could pass with your theories.
I have never stated the greenhouse theory is invalid
water vapour has a dipole moment and absorbs infrared radiation at multiple frequencies
water is such an amazing molecule >> Natures universal temperature regulator
catastrophic AGW is however not at all supported by empirical evidence
why would I point out the greenhouse effect is almost entirely occurring in the troposphere if the greenhouse theory was invalid ?
you really should stop misrepresenting others.... that is the behaviour of an ill mannered child
too funny
what makes you think the physical laws of nature I agree with are my theories ?
I can not take credit for the work of Plank, Stephan , Boltzmann and so many other brilliant scientists
you are not very bright
Last edited:
You continue to deny that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is linked to increases in global surface temperature.
water vapour is the dominate greenhouse gasYou continue to deny that the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is linked to increases in global surface temperature.
Co2 is a bit player and the all important 15 micrometer absorption wavelength is saturated
the global surface temperature record is a mess
it
a)is filled with errors
b) is biased by the urban island heat effect
c) is grossly incomplete (70% of the surface is oceans)
d) has been fiddled with
e) is not representative of where the greenhouse effect occurs (i.e. in the troposphere)
use a mess as the input to models and you will get a mess as the output
what is the output of climate models ?
A mess
a mess used to generate, evil , intentionally misleading propaganda
Like I said, there is no way you could have a degree in chemistry or chemical engineering with idiotic ideas like this, larue.
Failing to understand the difference between forcing and feedback effects and your wacko personal theory about IR absorption would get you laughed out of university.
I call bullshit on your claims of having a degree in the sciences.
google search
https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-atmospheric-concentrations-greenhouse-gases#:~:text=Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.Water vapor
Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.Nov 1, 2023
Atmospheric Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases | US EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (.gov)
https://www.epa.gov › climate-indicators › climate-chan...
"absorption of outgoing thermal radiation by water vapour creates most of the earths natural greenhouse effect"
saturated forcings
but you are a fool who dropped out of high school
nobody cares what you call bullshit on
Last edited:
Like I said, larue, you don't understand the difference between forcing and feedback effects in the climate.
Its why you don't understand the greenhouse effect and why you'd be failed in science programs at university or even high school.
Water vapour is a feedback effect
CO2 is a forcing effect
One reacts to changes the other causes changes.
How do wet cow farts factor into all of this? Feedback or forcing, or both?
I say both based on your description. Thoughts?
I encourage you to continue your deep research into the matter, but quietly, don't bring it up.
People will laugh.
go finish high school
a 15 micron wavelength photon travelling at the speed of light does not stop to ask the molecule in its path if it is a forcing molecule or a feedback only molecule
because the fool frankfooter says so ? I do not think so
Water vapour is the dominate Greenhouse gas responsible for 95% of the greenhouse effect
Its called the blue planet for a reason
there is water (natures universal temperature moderator) just about everywhere
400 parts per million CO2 does not drive this
nor does it drive this
Last edited:
Yes, larue, it does.
Clearly you can't have a degree in anything to do with chemistry if you make such basic mistakes.
Attachments
Clearly you failed all sciences and couldn't possibly have any degree in sciences.
If you can't understand the difference between forcing and feedback you really have no business in these discussions.
Go back to high school and learn the basics.
