Mike, sorry about that, It should be “The “Realist” point of View!

Getting tired, not focusing!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

I’m guessing your Industry experience informs you that would have been the way to go?

Mike,sorry but I can’t take credit for this article. As most know here I help out at GWH.com on posting revealent articles in the “Realist” point of you and scientific papers. This retired Chemist signed up the other night and was referred to by a friend that He had posted a very good comment at our Site. I turned his comments into an article because what He stated is very close to the latest being found about CO2 and in relationship to AGW…Plus I think He had some very interesting knowledge I haven’t seen from this perspective before.. The Equipment used and comparisions. Never seen this before. “Bernhard” saw and experienced happenstances out in the field. Good comments and very good look on how this work was done. I liked his views,of course. I hope Mike you saw something in that article that will help you keep your perspective on CO2 and the Greenhouse Effect.

Another person here to give perspective is co2isnotevil. He’s very good. I love his comments on this..Another is Prof. Richard Lindzen of MIT. He has the latest findings on this issue and it knocks down completely the AGW theory.

As far as understanding, it sounds like you are on the right track. Keep researching because Science is suppose to bring in new and different information for review and study…Never close your Mind like the Alarmists do…Joanne was one once but She “saw the Light” and now She’s helping the “Realist” cause..

Oh, Mike, you are welcome!! Glad to help!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Denny, thanks for the link, I see three takeaway points. Firstly, that Gas Chromatography was inappropriately used to measure CO2 concentrations instead of Infrared Spectrophotometry. I’m guessing your Industry experience informs you that would have been the way to go?

The second point and the thing that has always seemed most important to me is that atmospheric H20 is a much more effective GHG compared to CO2 and it seems like it should always dominate the heat exchanges in the atmosphere; by virtue of of its broader absorption and emission spectrum and by virtue of its much greater concentration in the atmosphere it carries much greater heat energy (I believe I’ve used the term correctly) than CO2. If the additional heat energy attributable to anthropogenic CO2 is less than the normal variation in the heat energy associated with H20, if it’s buried in the noise, there is no AGW, at least in the sense it has no capacity to influence the direction of global warming or cooling.

Last point is that you identified local effects that hamper attempts take meaningful measurements of CO2, similar to urban encroachment and the heat island effect as it relates to surface temps.

Nothing new here, hopefully just demonstrating that I understood Denny, how’d I do mate?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mike, good questions, and I would like to direct you to this if I may; http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1290.last

You Open The Door, So Shall I Speak, A Retired Chemist’s View

This will help what isn’t!!!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Mattb: In my understanding of the English language, the term “is getting too far ahead of” does not infer that the position is correct, merely that it is an over-enthusiastic embracement of a trend that can leave you isolated.

In the postmodernist world, and in bubble economics perhaps being “ahead of the pack” doesn’t mean they are right, but remember, this is supposed to be science. And science is the pursuit of knowledge. So “Ahead of the pack” tells us he knows more than his buddies. Except he doesn’t.

Unless they are referring to the race back to prehistory…

Like or Dislike: 1  0

I am not in a position to answer your questions. But I reckon you might “enjoy” this…

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Further reading seems to suggest the translational molecular velocity is mainly responsible for conducting heat in an ‘ideal gas’. Can anyone conform this? How significant is molecular vibration for conducting heat in a gas?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

1A In the real world, which effect dominates the transfer of heat energy for atmospheric CO2; convection, conduction or radiation?

1B Can someone neatly describe the summed effects of those three interactions for a CO2 laden atmosphere?

1C What does direct observation of the atmosphere indicate with regard to the modes of heat transfer?

2A Is the emission spectrum for CO2 basically the same as the absorption spectrum; 2.7, 4.3 and 15 microns sound about right? Lit seems to imply CO2 doesn’t behave as a blackbody, is that correct?

(Here’s the only stuff I could find on the infrared emission spectrum of CO2, anyone got more I could look at? http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/107/2767/48 )

2B What else besides CO2 molecules will absorb the re-radiated infrared emissions? I already understand of course that the absorption bands of CO2 and H20 overlap at some wavelengths. Boy, here’s where things get dangerous and I make a few assumptions, so let’s get down to it, I assume that where the absorption freqs overlap, H20 is probably already saturated courtesy of the upwelling blackbody radiation?

2C Is downwelling infrared at the unique emission wavelengths of CO2 being detected and measured?

2D Assuming, and I do mean assuming, that the rest of the atmosphere cannot absorb radiation at 4.3 and 15 microns does that mean that the ‘warming’ effect on the rest of the atmosphere due to CO2 is due to conduction?

2E If it is via conduction, I need some help understanding how a vibrationally excited CO2 molecule transfers that energy to other molecules in the atmosphere. Can vibrational molecular energy pass from one molecule to another without radiation? Can vibrational molecular energy turn into translational kinetic energy? How is each effect relevant to ‘warming’ of the atmosphere?

2F What is the difference between heat and temperature as it relates to (ideal) gasses, help!

Thanks in advance guys and girls.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Steve McIntyre explains the trick
Apologies if already posted.

Like or Dislike: 0  0