|
Ho ho. that was clever.
/sarcasm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why not give it a try, perhaps it could be both of us.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to tease you; Venus might have been alive 
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Unlikely, unless it had a much thinner atmosphere before. Its surface temperature is so high because its atmosphere is 90 times as thick as earths, not because of CO2. In fact its albedo is so high, and atmosphere so dense, the sunlight that reaches the surface is so feeble it causes no warming at all. This is why its night tijme temp is the same as its daytime. Even though its day is much longer than earths.
No, the surface is not warmed by the GH effect, there isnt any.
|
|
|
|
|
Venus is still the best proof what greenhouse-gasses do; and a greenhouse does not work by heating the floor 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
The greenhouse effect does work though by heating a floor, because it depends on the frequency change form visible to IR, from sun light to a frequency that CO2 can trap.
And since there is no visible light at the surface of venus (well, it is feeble, about 10 watts or so) there is no GH effect.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: The greenhouse effect does work though by heating a floor, because it depends on the frequency change form visible to IR, from sun light to a frequency that CO2 can trap.
No idea what that frequency change stuff is supposed to mean, but every farmer will claim the same; it is not the floor.
Also, air is not a vacuum; humid air warms up in a greenhouse, regardless of your floor 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: No idea what that frequency change stuff is supposed to mean
Visible light passes through CO2, warms the surface, which starts to emit in the IR. IR is in part blocked by CO2, and reradiated back towards the surface, thus causing additional warming.
The visible to IR is the frequency change that is fundamental to the GH effect.
Dont mistake a greenhouse for the GH effect, the mechanisms are very different.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: Visible light passes through CO2, warms the surface, which starts to emit in the IR.
AFAIK, IR is just another invisible wave within the visible lightwave. Matter does not "emit" anything, it reflects or absorbs those waves.
Munchies_Matt wrote: Dont mistake a greenhouse for the GH effect, the mechanisms are very different.
Hence the name
The same would apply to Venus; you don't need to hit the ground to heat the air, and it doesn't matter how much reaches the ground if none of the heat is radiated back into space
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: Er, no, IR is beyond the visible: Light Spectrum – EYE Lighting[^]
I didn't say it was visible; just that it is part of the save waves that the sun shines which we call "light".
Munchies_Matt wrote: Er, no, all bodies, matter, above absolute zero emit energy. All matter with a temperature greater than absolute zero emits thermal radiation[^]
That may be mathematically true, but it is not enough to warm, say, the moon Europa. The amount of warmth emitted can be neglected.
Munchies_Matt wrote: How does visible light, which passes through air, heat it?
The same way it heats the ground; air is particles, and thus, matter. You're acting as if it were a vacuum, which space even isn't
Munchies_Matt wrote: Without the sun heating the ground there is no greenhouse effect.
Without the sun, no greenhouse; but no ground is required.
So yes, sounds like you're wordsmithing again
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
you:"[IR is] within the visible lightwave"
you: "I didn't say it was visible"
Whats next, almost visible?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: That may be mathematically true, but it is not enough to warm, say, the moon Europa
We arent talking here about x warming y, but the fact that matter above absolute zero emits energy. Period.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The same way it heats the ground; air is particles, and thus, matter
But visible light passes through air so it cant heat it (otherwise there would be loss of energy, ie, the light would not pass through it.)
Eddy Vluggen wrote: but no ground is required
There is if you want to explain the temperature of the ground. 
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: you:"[IR is] within the visible lightwave"
you: "I didn't say it was visible"
Whats next, almost visible?
Visible with the right equipment. That's how IR was discovered.
Munchies_Matt wrote: We arent talking here about x warming y, but the fact that matter above absolute zero emits energy. Period.
As if the energy of a single lighter or match would distort the image we see when talking about the energy that's output by the sun How much energy did the mass generate that you lost by excercising, hm?
Munchies_Matt wrote: But visible light passes through air so it cant heat it (otherwise there would be loss of energy, ie, the light would not pass through it.)
Visible and invisible light do not "pass" through air like a vacuum. It interacts with the matter. It is rather idiotic to claim that a few air-particles (like ozone) would block all light.
Munchies_Matt wrote: There is if you want to explain the temperature of the ground.
That is not your original statement; you claimed you need ground for a greenhouse. You don't. I'll happily build you one without
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
You dont know when to stop digging do you?
How Infrared Light was Discovered[^] IR was not 'made visible'.
you: "Matter does not "emit" anything"
You are wrong, period. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you are wrong and move on.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Visible and invisible light do not "pass" through air like a vacuum
If the air is pure dry and dust free visible light will largely pass through.
IR though will be largely blocked by CO2 at the frequencies earth emits. This is the basic process by which the GH effect works.
Why cant you accept known science, even after I have given you links?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: That is not your original statement;
Yes it was. Me: "the surface is not warmed by the GH effect"
surface = ground.
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: You dont know when to stop digging do you?
How Infrared Light was Discovered[^] IR was not 'made visible'.
I didn't say it becomes visible light; but yes, a thermometer makes the effect visible. Where is your explanation on how that light hit the ground and how it was distorted by the energy released by the mass of the thermometer?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
you: "Matter does not "emit" anything"
You are wrong, period. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you are wrong and move on.
The amount of heat generated by the thermometer is rediculously small, compared to the amount of energy it is measuring. Otherwise we would not even have thermometers
Munchies_Matt wrote: If the air is pure dry and dust free visible light will largely pass through.
Changing your claim again to fit the current conditions? Even pure dray air that is dust free has matter. You will always loose energy if you send light through a non-vacuum. Basic physics.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Why cant you accept known science, even after I have given you links?
Because you're spouting nonsense, with claims that change by the minute
Munchies_Matt wrote: That is not your original statement;
Yes it was. Me: "the surface is not warmed by the GH effect"
surface = ground.
You changed the claim to include the portion "if you want to explain the temperature on the ground". So no, not your original claim. Also not required for a greenhouse-effect. Like I said, as simple-minded as I am, I know how to build one without a floor. See, heat rises - you don't need a floor to trap it.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
1) you said: "IR is just another invisible wave within the visible lightwave"
The fact is that IR is BEYOND the visible spectrum. Get it? It is NOT within the visible spectrum.
2) You are wrong, period. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you are wrong and move on.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: You will always loose energy if you send light through a non-vacuum. Basic physics
Your basic physics is wrong. it depends on the matter. Very obviously glass does not absorb visible light, that is why it is used in fiber optic cables.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I know how to build one without a floor. See, heat rises - you don't need a floor to trap it
Dear oh god, (shakes head) you still dont understand the difference between a greenhouse and the GGH effect, even after I gave you the wiki link? Did you even bother reading it?
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: 1) you said: "IR is just another invisible wave within the visible lightwave"
The fact is that IR is BEYOND the visible spectrum. Get it? It is NOT within the visible spectrum.
IR "light" is part of sunlight. Its effect can be made visible with equipment that we use to make observations. Those are simple statements. I never claimed you can see visible light and have explained so.
Munchies_Matt wrote: 2) You are wrong, period. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you are wrong and move on.
Again, how much energy did the thermometer generate? The amount it generates is not even enough to influence the observation
Munchies_Matt wrote: Your basic physics is wrong. it depends on the matter. Very obviously glass does not absorb visible light, that is why it is used in fiber optic cables.
No, you are basically lying to justify your claim. Even fiber optic cables are not 100% efficient. Never noticed that even "perfect glass" warms up in the sun?
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Dear oh god, (shakes head) you still dont understand the difference between a greenhouse and the GGH effect, even after I gave you the wiki link? Did you even bother reading it?
No; just like I did not bother with the your claim about greening from the NASA. The increase in plankton and agriculture is not "proof" that CO2 is "entirely" beneficial. That's not how proof works - as also has been explained a ton of times.
The reason you do not confront any scientist or even the media with your "proof" is because any kid from an elementary school can point out the flaws in your reasoning
Seriously, if you have ANY evidence, you can be on the frontpage of the newspaper here. And you won't, because you'd be laughed away.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: IR "light" is part of sunlight
No sh*t, but that isnt what you said.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Again, how much energy did the thermometer generate?
Who cares? I certainly dont. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you were wrong.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Never noticed that even "perfect glass" warms up in the sun?
No, because it wont. If it transmits visible energy perfectly it wont heat up.
As for the rest, WTF has that got to do with greenhouses blocking convection and the GH effect blocking IR?
Try to stick to the point at least! 
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote:
No sh*t, but that isnt what you said.
That is what I said. It still is there if you feel the need to verify
Munchies_Matt wrote: Who cares? I certainly dont. All matter above absolute zero emits energy. Admit you were wrong.
You don't care about right or wrong, just about "proving" you are right. You're not. The amount of energy generated by a mass tiny, unless you talk about gravity. It is not even enough to influence the thermometer, and it certainly isn't relevant in this discussion.
Munchies_Matt wrote: No, because it wont. If it transmits visible energy perfectly it wont heat up.
It will, because in a non-vacuum there will not be perfect energy transmission. There's molecules in the path that your protons bounce into, heating the medium. Your "perfect glass" is a vacuum, not air.
Munchies_Matt wrote: As for the rest, WTF has that got to do with greenhouses blocking convection and the GH effect blocking IR?
Try to stick to the point at least!
You are the one who keeps dragging stuff into the conversation to sound knowledgable; I just keep pointing out what any kid would do, and with the same fervor.
Seriously, you make my chickens laugh; the greenhouse-effect is named after greenhouses because they have nothing in common. You invented light here that suddenly doesn't collide with anything, and air that has no particles (not even to breathe!).
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Munchies_Matt wrote: Do you understand English or is it just a random bunch of sounds to you?
You out of arguments again?
Munchies_Matt wrote: Thats right, thermometers do not measure the temperature of matter do they.
Haha, as a true sofist, no arguments - just trying to mingle some words. The thermometer is not used to measure the temperature of a mass, it just displays the volume of the current fluid in the thing. That observation says something about the temperature that you are measuring, which is NOT just the temperature of matter - YOUR link on IR explains that. Or did you want to claim that IR has "mass"? :p
You're struggling with basic physics - and no, that's not a claim, but merely an observation
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've been prescribed multiple. You out of arguments again?
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Dont mistake being out of arguments with not wanting to waste them on someone with some kind of mental aberration.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
