Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
-> the long and the short about water vapour: (Read 455 times)
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
-> the long and the short about water vapour:
Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:28pm
 
Tom Curtis at 08:28 AM on 3 March 2016
Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas
shorter arationofreason @228, "I have had this random thought bubble.  This random thought bubble disagrees with the conclusions of 1000s of scientists who have devoted tens of thousands of person hours to the problem.  Therefore the 1000s of scientists must be wrong, and so wrong that only utter stupidity or corruption could explain the error."

The breath taking arrogance displayed demonstrates that 'arationofreason' is on a very short ration of reason indeed.


Among the facts that arationofreasonneglects in his thought bubble are that:

1)  The CO2 contribution to the total greenhouse effect is about 20%, not 1%;

2)  The 1.7 W/m^2 is the change in the CO2 contribution since the preindustrial, not the total contribution;

3)  Because CO2 does not precipitate out with reduced temperature, while water does, the upper troposphere has very much less H2O than does the surface, but very close to the same amount of CO2, resulting in CO2 dominating IR absorption and reemission in the upper troposphere;

4)  Because H2O precipitates out with reduced temperature, eliminating all CO2 (and hence 20% of the total greenhouse effect) would result in the precipitation of a great deal of the H2O in the atmosphere, reducing the IR impact of the remaining H2O.  That in turn would precipitate out yet more H2O, and so on.  The net effect (http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-would-a-CO2-free-atmosphere-look-like.html) is that in the absence of all long lived greenhouse gases, and assuming there had been no increase in the extent of ice sheets and/or deserts (ie, that albedo only changed due to reduced cloud cover, and increase in snowfields), only 10% of the current H2O would remain in the atmosphere, and temperatures would plumet by around 35 degrees celcius.

...



You don't need to be stupid or corrupt to not realize the above.  All you need to do is to mistake abysmal ignorance for wisdom.

Moderator Response:
[PS] You know better but thanks for tackling the substance.


source: comment 229, http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php?a=19
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #1 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:50pm
 
Your really love skeptical science - don't you?

When water vapour precipitates out - is it 100% gone? Or does some remain in the atmosphere?

Isn't water vapour constantly being replenished in the atmosphere?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #2 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:53pm
 
lee wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:50pm:
Your really love skeptical science - don't you?

When water vapour precipitates out - is it 100% gone? Or does some remain in the atmosphere?

Isn't water vapour constantly being replenished in the atmosphere?

Are you reducing the argument to some other type of argument on purpose?

In other words: are you trying to argue black is white  ??

eaT tHe ChildRen ecONOmics is lees forte ladies and gentle-features!

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

bye Bye sideshow_Mal  Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry Cry
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
John_Taverner
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #3 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 5:22pm
 
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:28pm:
Among the facts that arationofreasonneglects in his thought bubble are that:

1)  The CO2 contribution to the total greenhouse effect is about 20%, not 1%;

2)  The 1.7 W/m^2 is the change in the CO2 contribution since the preindustrial, not the total contribution;

3)  Because CO2 does not precipitate out with reduced temperature, while water does, the upper troposphere has very much less H2O than does the surface, but very close to the same amount of CO2, resulting in CO2 dominating IR absorption and reemission in the upper troposphere;

4)  Because H2O precipitates out with reduced temperature, eliminating all CO2 (and hence 20% of the total greenhouse effect) would result in the precipitation of a great deal of the H2O in the atmosphere, reducing the IR impact of the remaining H2O.  That in turn would precipitate out yet more H2O, and so on.  The net effect (http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-would-a-CO2-free-atmosphere-look-like.html) is that in the absence of all long lived greenhouse gases, and assuming there had been no increase in the extent of ice sheets and/or deserts (ie, that albedo only changed due to reduced cloud cover, and increase in snowfields), only 10% of the current H2O would remain in the atmosphere, and temperatures would plumet by around 35 degrees celcius.

http://chriscolose.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/lacis_etaal.jpg



You don't need to be stupid or corrupt to not realize the above.  All you need to do is to mistake abysmal ignorance for wisdom.



Not bad......

So who are you, and what have you done with Deathridesahorse (aka his latest moniker ?)
Back to top
 
72+Adelaide+Street  
IP Logged
 
John_Taverner
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #4 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 5:23pm
 
lee wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:50pm:
Your really love skeptical science - don't you?


What's wrong with being Sceptical? Science needs to be sceptical.

Ok, I see now that it's a web site. I don't follow blogs.

Just one addition to that post of DRAH's. Water vapour has practically no effect in the Lower Stratosphere, where the temperature (and water dew point) is extremely low.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 3rd, 2016 at 5:28pm by John_Taverner »  
72+Adelaide+Street  
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #5 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:23pm
 
John_Taverner wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 5:22pm:
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:28pm:
Among the facts that arationofreasonneglects in his thought bubble are that:

1)  The CO2 contribution to the total greenhouse effect is about 20%, not 1%;

2)  The 1.7 W/m^2 is the change in the CO2 contribution since the preindustrial, not the total contribution;

3)  Because CO2 does not precipitate out with reduced temperature, while water does, the upper troposphere has very much less H2O than does the surface, but very close to the same amount of CO2, resulting in CO2 dominating IR absorption and reemission in the upper troposphere;

4)  Because H2O precipitates out with reduced temperature, eliminating all CO2 (and hence 20% of the total greenhouse effect) would result in the precipitation of a great deal of the H2O in the atmosphere, reducing the IR impact of the remaining H2O.  That in turn would precipitate out yet more H2O, and so on.  The net effect (http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-would-a-CO2-free-atmosphere-look-like.html) is that in the absence of all long lived greenhouse gases, and assuming there had been no increase in the extent of ice sheets and/or deserts (ie, that albedo only changed due to reduced cloud cover, and increase in snowfields), only 10% of the current H2O would remain in the atmosphere, and temperatures would plumet by around 35 degrees celcius.

http://chriscolose.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/lacis_etaal.jpg



You don't need to be stupid or corrupt to not realize the above.  All you need to do is to mistake abysmal ignorance for wisdom.



Not bad......

So who are you, and what have you done with Deathridesahorse (aka his latest moniker ?)

That wasn't me: that was one of the resident commentators at skeptical science!
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #6 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:25pm
 
John_Taverner wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 5:23pm:
lee wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 3:50pm:
Your really love skeptical science - don't you?


What's wrong with being Sceptical? Science needs to be sceptical.

Ok, I see now that it's a web site. I don't follow blogs.

Just one addition to that post of DRAH's.
Water vapour has practically no effect in the Lower Stratosphere, where the temperature (and water dew point) is extremely low.

I'll try and take this on board!  Wink
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
John_Taverner
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male
Re: -> the long and the short about water vapour:
Reply #7 - Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:53pm
 
BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Mar 3rd, 2016 at 7:23pm:
That wasn't me: that was one of the resident commentators at skeptical science!


Well, he seems well informed.
Back to top
 
72+Adelaide+Street  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print