layman
 
  -1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:02 pm
@parados,
Quote:
Gosh. You failed to mention according to some guy the earth is flat.


Are you trying to claim that what the guy said was wrong, Parry? Or just getting in your quota of sophistic fallacy that you perceive to be brilliant. Nothing you said in response even addresses what he said. Go figure, eh?
parados
 
  1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:06 pm
@layman,
Really? Nothing I said addresses what he said?


What he said -

Does carbon dioxide trap and retain heat? No, although it cools more slowly than some other gases, it absorbs some amount of heat and quickly cools the same amount when the heat source is removed.


What I said -

When CO2 cools more slowly it raises temperature. There is no denying it. Every 12 hours or so we have this thing called the sun that pumps energy into the earth's atmosphere. When that energy can't escape as fast as it used to it causes temperature to rise. This is some pretty simple physics.


Did you not bother to read what you posted? Or did you just want to make claims that anyone can see are wrong?
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:11 pm
@parados,
Quote:
Did you not bother to read what you posted?


Yeah, you talked about advocating a flat earth. Parry, I have found it is utterly futile to try to discuss a point with you, because you can never see the point to anything. You think every non sequitur in the book is "relevant" because you can't discern relevancy from irrelevancy.
parados
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:22 pm
@layman,
So you just ignored the majority of my post and then misrepresented what I said there? Golly gee and I am the one that can't discern relevancy?

The point is that the person you quoted who you found on the internet is making a statement that is about scientifically accurate as claiming the earth is flat. When you heat something up to a higher temperature it will be HOTTER. That is simple physics. The sun rises every day. It provides energy to that atmosphere. If the atmosphere cools down slower at night because of increased CO2, the cumulative effect will be hotter temperatures.
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:23 pm
@parados,
The question was this:

Quote:
Are you trying to claim that what the guy said was wrong, Parry?


I notice that you haven't made any attempt whatsoever to answer the question.

You have made assertions, but they don't relate to anything he said, such as:

Quote:
The point is that the person you quoted who you found on the internet is making a statement that is about scientifically accurate as claiming the earth is flat.



What did he say that is wrong?

You say:

Quote:
The sun rises every day. It provides energy to that atmosphere. If the atmosphere cools down slower at night because of increased CO2, the cumulative effect will be hotter temperatures.


Did he say otherwise? He was even talking about that, only you are.

parados
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:38 pm
@layman,
But let's look further at the person you found on the internet and what they said.
Quote:


Global warming advocates claim that CO2 rises up in the atmosphere
Really? Which global warming advocates state that CO2 rising up in the atmosphere is the cause of global warming? CO2 mixes in the atmosphere just like all other gases. By mixing it's concentrations increase throughout the atmosphere. We measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations at 3400 meters (2 miles) above sea level. We know that the amount of CO2 is increasing at that elevation. If CO2 doesn't rise at all as your author claimed we would not be seeing increases at those elevations.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:40 pm
@layman,
Quote:

Did he say otherwise? He was even talking about that, only you are.

Actually, he did say otherwise. Didn't you read what you posted of his?
parados
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:56 pm
@layman,
Quote:


I notice that you haven't made any attempt whatsoever to answer the question.

Gosh. Most people can figure out when I counter what someone said, it would clearly show that I am saying they are wrong. You don't seem to be able to understand that.

Quote:
Did he say otherwise? He was even talking about that, only you are.
Where do you think the energy comes from that warms the atmosphere? He stated that CO2 cools slower than other gases. When you have an energy source that is cyclical like the sun is, it rises every day, and when something cools slower than it did before the cyclical heat source will cause a temperature rise over time. That is basic physics. You add energy and then subtract it. When you add more energy than you subtract you get a temperature increase. Why did I bring up the sun? Because it is the energy source that is on a timer every day.
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:57 pm
@parados,
Now you're just changing the subject again. That's not what you said the first time.

Do some research. CO2 is heavier than air, and it does sink. Wind currents can move it upward, but it takes a force to do that. It doesn't just "rise," it sinks. And it stays sunk, left on its own. That's why rocks are formed by extracting carbon from CO2.
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 01:59 pm
@parados,
I been through this kind of wild goose chase with you before, Parry, and I aint gunna do it again. I will simply repeat what I first said and leave it at that:


Quote:
Yeah, you talked about advocating a flat earth. Parry, I have found it is utterly futile to try to discuss a point with you, because you can never see the point to anything. You think every non sequitur in the book is "relevant" because you can't discern relevancy from irrelevancy.
parados
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 02:14 pm
@layman,
Quote:

Do some research. CO2 is heavier than air, and it does sink. Wind currents can move it upward, but it takes a force to do that.

Wow. I need to do research? Is CO2 responsible for the rocks in your head?

CO2 is heavier than O2, H, N2, He, H2O but in a gaseous mixture the energy of the molecules themselves is enough to cause them to mix and not stratify. No wind required. The sun warming the atmosphere will cause it to mix as molecules vibrate faster and bounce off each other.

Quote:
And it stays sunk, left on its own. That's why rocks are formed by extracting carbon from CO2.
If we accept that at face value then we would find large quantities of CO2 in caves where there is no wind. Why don't we do you think?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 02:15 pm
@layman,
So you will run away rather then admit you are wrong?
layman
 
  1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 03:51 pm
@parados,
If I say "Tomorrow is Sunday," God only knows what you will claim I said, Parry.

You might pretend that I said "The earth will explode at 1:30 PM, EST on October 10, 2022."

Then you will rail on for pages attacking that claim. And at the end of it all, I will just say:

"All I said was that tomorrow is Sunday."

Then, of course, you will then say "that's not what you said" and you will then repeat your entire rant.
parados
 
  3  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:27 pm
@layman,
You said -
Quote:

According to this guy, CO2 does not retain or trap heat:


I pointed out that the guy didn't really have any evidence to support that contention. He made several silly statements such as CO2 doesn't rise as global warming advocates claim when I know of no global warming advocate that argues that global warming is happening because CO2 is rising.

Then he said this...
Quote:
it cools more slowly than some other gases, it absorbs some amount of heat and quickly cools the same amount when the heat source is removed.

It cools more slowly as long as the heat source is removed. The energy source is the sun. That energy source is never removed completely. It is only removed for a period of time and then is reapplied. Since CO2 cools more slowly unless it has time to radiate all the heat build up it would continue to increase in temperature over time because the energy source is reapplied every day. He ignores several things about cooling and the time it takes to happen. You wanted to argue that his statement has nothing to do with the sun which is ridiculous.

You said something and then posted a quote in support of your statement. I am only pointing out that your statement is as silly as saying someone on the internet says the earth is flat.
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:39 pm
@parados,
Quote:
You wanted to argue that his statement has nothing to do with the sun which is ridiculous....You said something and then posted a quote in support of your statement.


See, there ya go again.
parados
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:42 pm
@layman,
So you didn't say something? Or you didn't post a quote? Or your statement had nothing to do with what you posted and you simply posted something that has nothing to do with your own thoughts on the subject? Ergo - you did nothing more than claim someone on the internet thinks the earth is flat.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:46 pm
I've little patience.

Is Layman the new Ronald Reagan?
parados
 
  1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:49 pm
@ossobuco,
Did Reagan think the atmosphere was layered?
layman
 
  0  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 05:58 pm
@parados,
Thomas said this:

Quote:
So if Baldimo is right about the effect of CO2 on heat retention being in doubt, all those farmers could have been wasting a lot of money over all this time. Baldimo should advise them to stop pumping CO2 into their greenhouses' glass walls and see what happens.


I pointed out to him that:

1. Greenhouses do not get, or stay, warm because CO2 is pumped into them. If you want to see the greenhouse effect, lock your puppy up in your car on a hot day and leave him there a few hours. No extra CO2 required.

2. Techincally speaking, CO2 does not "retain" heat. It radiates it, and some of that radiation heads back to earth, further warming it.

No one (and that includes the guy I quoted--at least to the extent I quoted him) claimed that C02 does not contribute to warming. The issue was about the mechanics (i.e., how, NOT IF) pertaining to the manner in which CO2 did this.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Sat 12 Dec, 2015 06:52 pm
@parados,
No idea, but there was some bushwa about trees causeing trouble.

Maybe he meant lacquered.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

U.S. Lags World in Grasp of Genetics and Acceptance of Evolution - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion? - Discussion by wandeljw
New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
New species of hominid discovered - Question by FBM
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
More (much more) dinosaur soft tissue turning up - Discussion by gungasnake
Must Scientific Knowledge Be Considered Relative? - Discussion by wandeljw
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE
  3. » Page 19
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 07:49:50
▲ ▼