no you dont. there are more than 2 greenhouse gasses. please do the exercise so we can talk about it. until you recognize ghe overall relationship of all the gasses...you are ignoring the entire system.
How is this determined?
you really have no,idea what specific heat capacity is? good god man, just look at the units.
how are you having this discussion with such a fundamentql gap in knowledge?
quote:I'm not sure what you're asking.
where did the excess CO2 go? Did the oceans re-absorb it even though temperatures were high?
Did the sun dim?
I'm not sure what you're asking.
I don't care how each gas got there. I also don't care which gas has how much effect on keeping us warm.
an you please, for the love of god, just admit that the atmosphere is responsible for what radiation gets in, and what radiation gets out?
so you dont actually care to debate the topic.
So you are using that cheap debate trick I alluded to earlier. And you also lied too....I'm done with you.
Some simple questions and observations:
1) Has the Earth been hotter than it is now?
2) Has the sea levels been a lot higher than they are Now?
3) If the answer to question 1 or 2 is "yes" then when and how often?
4) Is the Earth 'perfect" right now? If man had the ability should we "lock" in today's climate and thus keep things exactly like they are?
Is the composition of the atmosphere the main factor that determines average global temperatures?
quote:No. You claimed that radiation from the atmosphere was equal in all directions. That simply isn't true. Your second misconception is assuming that "equilibirum" means static and stable. It means neither. A bathtub with a hole leaking as fast is the faucet is filling it is at equilibrium, but it isn't static.
Have I not been saying all along that the sun heats the earth to the point where the heat radiated from the earth is in equilibrium with the amount it receives from the sun?
If earth had no atmosphere, it would be pretty cold, would it not?
quote:NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Gases in the atmosphere ARE NOT A SOURCE OF HEAT. PERIOD.
The gases in the atmosphere warm the surface.
quote:Hey jackass. Some of us have jobs. It isn't like the library doesn't have thermo books in it. It isn't anyone else's job to teach you. The knowledge base is out there for you to learn. Notice how I keep asking you questions? Go find the answer to them. They are the questions that when answered will tell you why AGW is a pittiful theory.
I am disappointed. I went to sleep last night hoping to wake up to a wealth of knowledge. I should have known, though, since even after my asking several times neither of you has even attempted to explain the process by which our atmosphere helps to warm the earth. Instead, you keep reverting to this condescending "I know thermodynamics and you don't" bull shite. You could know everything there is to know, but it doesn't do much good if you can't communicate it to anyone.
quote:yeah. None of that increases the Cp of CO2.
While I work on the visual effects, you check out the wavelengths that water vapor do not absorb, and instead allow a great deal of the infrared spectrum to radiate unimpeded into space. And then compare that to the spectrum that CO2 absorbs, and see how much of the water vapor "window" it closes. After that we can argue over the concentrations required of each to have a given effect on the temperature.
quote:No. CO2 has varied wildly over the climatic record. As has nitrogen, SO4, and many other constituents. When did this balance you speak of occur?
The concentrations of all gases are kept relatively stable through natural cycles, right?
quote:Really? You believe the Cp of a liquid-vapor phase is the same as a single phase gas?
I don't know enough about heat capacity to make much sense of the numbers, so I will just say that I believe water vapor and methane are about on par with one another,
quote:You're getting closer. Now account for the heat of formation and vaporization along with the difference of radiation potential at the surface compared to the upper troposphere/lower stratosphere.
Now, how does this capacity relate to the amount of infrared radiation they absorb? Also, why is it not ok to assume that if water were the only greenhouse gas, that since the water cycle is so fast, and that since it has both positive (increased heat capacity) and negative (increased albedo when clouds form, etc.) feedback, shouldn't temperature variations correct very quickly, relatively speaking?