|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2016 1:39:48 GMT
Hey, I got you and Icefisher to begin to be civil again! I also don't say strange things. I am glad that you have clarified that you KNOW the earth system does not function like a greenhouse! With that in mind, what has been the point of the discussion? Cause ya see, I have been lost as it appears that you are trying to state a heat transfer in a closed environment somehow is applicable to the earth's atmosphere. It isn't. Are you lost or are you just causing trouble? Icefisher is objecting to simple experiments being used to demonstrate things on the surface where when questioned why he is objecting he brings forth pages of gibberish. At this stage I am trying to work out why his royal highness believes the engineers net radiation heat loss curves cannot be used to bring sense to a fridge thought experiment which is 100% based on famous experimental evidence produced 224 years ago when the cold from snow was apparently instantly reflected using two mirrors over a distance of 12 feet onto a cooled thermometer surrounded by room temperature air. ie if you warm the cold you cause the heated object to become warmer. for 4 years I have been trying to get him to yield to reality on a topic a child can understand.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 1:54:33 GMT
OK, so in all of this, you are not inferring anything that you are posting has to do with atmospheric physics?
Is that a correct statement?
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2016 2:03:13 GMT
OK, so in all of this, you are not inferring anything that you are posting has to do with atmospheric physics? Is that a correct statement? I am talking about the idea of a warmer world via radiation processes where it is claimed this is impossible. and i am saying the idea is a very simple one very well supported by modern science. It is weird. We are talking about an idea well supported in science and Icefisher refuses to allow it to exist even as an idea and just produces unintelligible gibberish reasons why these well known scientific observations are not true. What is more it is totally obvious that when he is pinned down he obfuscates misdirects and does all he can to avoid his incorrect thinking being exposed. I cannot explain that behaviour. is he a troll? mentally ill? i just do not know. Icefisher seems to enjoy getting me to say the same thing over and over via different routes. maybe somebody in a betting shop is working this to see just how long i will hold out? That would make more sense than anything else I can think of.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:15:06 GMT
Ok, this is where you loose me.
You post experiments that are in a closed system. Said closed system in no way reflects earth's atmosphere.
Are you trying to correlate a closed system to earth's atmosphere?
This is the area that I get lost in, as these are two totally separate things. The physics of the atmosphere does not resemble a closed system experiment.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2016 2:21:29 GMT
Ok, this is where you loose me. You post experiments that are in a closed system. Said closed system in no way reflects earth's atmosphere. Are you trying to correlate a closed system to earth's atmosphere? This is the area that I get lost in, as these are two totally separate things. The physics of the atmosphere does not resemble a closed system experiment. I cannot understand why you are going down this line one more time. You cannot falsify an experiment created on the surface of the earth on the basis it will not work in some other location. You have to give a reason why it cannot work on the surface of the earth. You are responding like Icefisher.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:24:41 GMT
I told you that your reasoning isn't making sense to me.
From your response, I am going to paraphrase.
1. You feel that an experiment in a closed system is applicable to an open system. Is that correct?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:26:32 GMT
You tell me that you understand that the atmosphere does not behave like a greenhouse. But then you try to tie a greenhouse experiment to a totally different environment, and expect the results to be the same?
Is that a correct assumption?
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Jan 30, 2016 2:28:02 GMT
If you are unable to answer a simple question of mine as to why you are unable to produce an understandable reason why you are objecting to the green house idea I have totally no interest in reading your long pieces of text. If you don't read what I write how would you know if I answered your question or not?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:28:10 GMT
For the record: I am not being obstinate. I am honestly trying to understand what you are proposing and the mechanics behind it. So far, I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:29:51 GMT
Can we isolate this?
Is the DISCUSSION about the atmosphere, or a damn greenhouse?
They are TWO totally different things!
It's like you are both talking over each other. I have attempted to get the jist of what this is actually about and I am totally lost!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2016 2:31:58 GMT
I told you that your reasoning isn't making sense to me. From your response, I am going to paraphrase. 1. You feel that an experiment in a closed system is applicable to an open system. Is that correct? You are repeatedly attempting to prove something that is totally irrelevant for what I am trying to explain to you. I am saying if icefisher wants to object to an experiment in a lab, then he should provide a reason that can be understood by another human being.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jan 30, 2016 2:35:19 GMT
You tell me that you understand that the atmosphere does not behave like a greenhouse. But then you try to tie a greenhouse experiment to a totally different environment, and expect the results to be the same? Is that a correct assumption? Why on earth are you once again trying to link my name to garden greenhouses?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:39:32 GMT
Andrew: You keep typing GREENHOUSE, hence the confusion on my part.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:40:30 GMT
Are you talking about the Atmosphere or a greenhouse? ?? Once again, two totalllllllly different things! The laws of a greenhouse do NOT apply to the atmosphere!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 30, 2016 2:43:55 GMT
I think I will just give up as I can't make heads or tails out of what is trying to be stated here.
Mixing apples, oranges and even throw in a few spuds. The horticulture of each is different, even tho they are all plants.
|
|