tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post1527046232329351529..comments2024-03-11T04:54:26.827-07:00Comments on THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Solar activity, ocean cycles, & water vapor explain 98% of climate change since 1900, NOT CO2!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-23358255253384899252017-04-22T22:38:08.064-07:002017-04-22T22:38:08.064-07:00This is a most interesting article. I have read th...This is a most interesting article. I have read through it several times and understand much from it (my PhD from decades ago is biochemistry so that is a handicap!) This seems like an important distillation -- has this (or will this) work be submitted for peer reviewed publication? If not I think it should be? Fargo44https://www.blogger.com/profile/07836292761618023671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-88693581425097193412016-12-29T14:27:45.768-08:002016-12-29T14:27:45.768-08:00"A common observation of thermalization by wa..."A common observation of thermalization by way of water vapor is cloudless nights cool faster when absolute water vapor content of the atmosphere is lower."<br />A cloud forms when the atmosphere is saturated with water vapor. Water vapor carries a great deal of latent heat, released when the atmosphere cools across the dew point. Thus when a cloudy sky cools, condensing water vapor counters the cooling. But a cloudless sky has insufficient water vapor to condense and release latent heat.hanelyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07173046002862833762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-807073815976278352016-12-29T14:19:25.609-08:002016-12-29T14:19:25.609-08:00The photo-chemical processes you describe are limi...The photo-chemical processes you describe are limited term energy sinks. Long term they come to zero on the total balance. So thermal radiation is, long run, the only way for heat to leave Earth. But what carbon climatists fail to consider is where that radiation is emitted, assuming that the surface must be directly cooled by radiation, when convection and phase change can carry heat to altitude far more efficiently. Then in the stratosphere "greenhouse gases" can radiate heat in thermal equilibrium with the rest of the universe.hanelyphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07173046002862833762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-3568152981417146582016-12-28T16:20:18.238-08:002016-12-28T16:20:18.238-08:00This isn't right either the "temperature&...This isn't right either the "temperature" of a gas is the statistical average of the kinetic energy of the gas, so there is a poisson distribution of energies from absolute zero *stationary* up to thousands of degrees. Any collision above the critical energy can result in a bond vibration that can result in a photon emission. So 15u Emission can come from just about anywhere in the atmosphere. This is why the 15u glow (emission) ( around 15% of surface emission ) doesn't necessarily represent the portion of energy remaining after transit through the atmosphere, it may represents the statistics of the conversion of translational velocity (Temperature) into bond vibrations upon collision. IE that emission is sourced from convective heat, not from surface IR emission.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-21601463756472850902016-12-28T13:00:28.485-08:002016-12-28T13:00:28.485-08:00"The only way that energy can significantly l..."The only way that energy can significantly leave earth is by thermal radiation"<br /><br />Arrrgh, you are infected by the warmist disease - in your very first sentence. In general most energy degrades to heat, the rotational momentum of the earth is several million times Annual Insolation, the orbital kinetic energy of the earth is 800 Billion times annual insolation as is the gravitational potential energy of the earth's position above the sun. Convert just a little of the rotational/kinetic energy of the earth to heat and you have a massive thermal input. Conversely pressure differences due to differential heating cause wind and waves, thermal energy raises GT of water to great heights (10 km) to belt down upon the earth at great speed, the air motion creates static electricity which belts down upon the earth in great lightning bolts. Photons are absorbed by plants and used in chemical reactions to make carbohydrates, in Humans photons are absorbed by the skin surface and used to chemically convert cholesterol to Vitamin D, there must be hundreds of other endothermic reactions driven by solar energy. Bio energy (the heat created by cellular respiration) is by my calculation at least 3 Watts per square meter. EM energy is both input from and sunk to many places and it is wrong to assume that radiation to/from space is the only source/sink. The idea that the earth is some ideal perpetual motion machine (Shortwave In - Longwave out = 0) is from an engineers point of view fanciful Climatologist dream state.<br /><br />The proper formulation is<br /><br />EM Exitance=Insolation+NRG-NRL where NRG is Non Radiative Gains, and NRL is Non Radiative Loss. Until all NRG and NRL sources and sinks are known for all sources and sinks 2 orders of magnitude below the supposed energy imbalance the imbalance can be considered WRONG. This means all sources and sinks above 6 mW per square meter need to be known to high precision.<br /><br />That IR Exitance is approximately the same as Insolation is a mere coincidence, not some fundamental feature of the climate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-31692410536390635412016-12-21T02:11:14.659-08:002016-12-21T02:11:14.659-08:00cannot add comment see:
http://joannenova.com.au/2...cannot add comment see:<br />http://joannenova.com.au/2016/12/weekend-unthreaded-147/#comment-1871438Will Janoschkahttp://wordpress.com/wiljan2014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-34693246256174214042016-12-20T19:53:47.746-08:002016-12-20T19:53:47.746-08:00Yes you are indeed correct that by Wein's Disp...Yes you are indeed correct that by Wein's Displacement Law 15 microns corresponds to an emitting temperature of -80C, which cannot warm any other object to a temp >-80C!MShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06714540297202434542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4142988674703954802.post-64745578199475807792016-12-20T19:41:32.953-08:002016-12-20T19:41:32.953-08:00But wait there's more! The article rightly sta...But wait there's more! The article rightly states 15 um as the only frequency CO2 can absorb Infra Red radiation. However I believe it correct that 15um infra red radiation only occurs at around -80C which is approximately 90Km up? And photons from CO2 at -80C don't have the energy to raise any electron on a warmer gas, water or solid molecule to a higher orbit and so raise its temperature.<br />The top of Mt Everest has a lot of radiative energy flying through the air, but the sir temperature is still very cold. Temperature is only a measure of kinetic energy and ignores all radiative energy. So I struggle to see how CO2 can cause any warming (or cooling) at all?<br /><br />A second point is that the daytime temps on the moon are way higher than on Earth and the night time temps way lower than Earths. So we can say that Green house gasses both cool and warm the atmosphere (though a much shorter day helps as well). Maybe more greenhouse gases will moderate daily temperatures even more?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com