Team Deciphers Sea-Level Rise From Last Time Earth’s CO2 Was as High as Today

Manipulated data is just fact as are claims such as 97% of scientist....

 

There are all kinds of paranoid conspiracy theorists out there. What makes your paranoid conspiracy theories special?

 

And you seem to have no idea of what that law actual says

That's completely insane.

By your lunatic standard, if I shine a flashlight at the sun, the photons don't reach the sun, because the sun is hotter.

So, is it your contention that my flashlight knows to stop emitting light towards the sun, or is it your contention that it emits light, but the photons vanish before reaching the sun?

In either case, please describe the physical process driving the behavior of the flashlight or photons.

And as heat isn't flowing from hot to cold under AGW theory, it agrees with the 2nd law. You seem to be confusing heat with energy.

 

Climategate.

 

Okay, that was special concerning how it confirmed the pathologically dishonest nature of all deniers, but how does that help Joseph?

 

It confirms his position.

 

Nope, that's yourself, good buddy.

The Sun does not absorb those photons.

False Dichotomy Fallacy. My contention is that the Sun does not absorb those photons.

If a photon is not of sufficient energy to elevate the body's energy state, then that new photon will not be absorbed. Source: Planck's Law

Correct. AGW theory has it flowing from cold to hot instead.

No, it rejects the 2nd law.

No, that's you, good buddy.

Heat is simply the flow of thermal energy. It is not thermal energy itself.

 

Yes, it does. What it doesn't do is warm the Sun.

Let's be precise here. A piece of matter will only absorb a photon if the photon carries a specific quanta of energy that matches the energy required to raise that piece of matter to a higher energy state. Otherwise the matter is said to be transparent to that photon. Photons are also spontaneously emitted in the reverse process and in accordance with the same energy states as those involving absorption. This energy can be utilized in primarily two different ways. It can keep the matter at the higher energy state. Or it can induce a dipole moment in the matter causing it to accelerate and impart that newly acquired energy via a kinetic interaction with another unit of matter. In this manner the aggregate body thermalizes. The reverse also happens where a kinetically acquired dipole moment can induce the spontaneous emission of a photon which carries energy away. In this manner the aggregate body dethermalizes. And in yet another mechanism the photon can lead to the stimulated emission in which two egress photons are created from a single ingress photon such that the net flow of energy from the matter is negative. What is happening in the Sun and flashlight scenario is that there just simply aren't enough high energy photon's in the flashlight beam to thermalize the Sun since so much of matter in the Sun is already at a very high energy state. The Sun still continues to emit photons and energy at a pace that greatly exceeds that of the flashlight. The net flow of heat and energy is still negative (away from the Sun). The flashlight may have slowed the rate at which the heat and energy flows away from the Sun, but only imperceptibly. That's why the Sun can absorb the photons from a cooler source (like a flashlight), but not be warmed by it.

No. That is not correct. The warming of Earth via GHGs occurs because the heat flows from a hot body (the Sun) to a cooler body (the Earth). The GHGs act as thermal barriers that impede the heat flow from Earth (warm body) to space (cold body). When you decrease the egress heat flow rate while keeping the ingress heat flow rate constant the body warms. Not only does this not violate either the 1LOT or the 2LOT, but they explicitly state that this is what must happen.

 

Your theory seems to reject conservation of energy, a cornerstone of physics.

Stars are not transparent. We know this for certain. A binary star does not shine right through its binary partner.

Photons going into a star but don't come out the other side. They get absorbed somewhere.

You claim is contradicted by observed evidence, so it is wrong.

 

We can also use Planck's law to help explain why stars or any warm body can absorb photons from a flashlight or any cool body without raising the temperature of the warm body. One thing you'll notice about Planck's Law is that at every spectral line on the curve a warm body will have a higher spectral irradiance than a cooler body. That means quantized energy states for all spectral lines are opening up faster than the photons from the cooler body can fill them. As a result the warm body still dethermalizes and cools. It just does so at a slower rate.

 

It's a complicated topic.

One thing is sure, the "energy states" of atoms don't enter into it, because stars are composed of plasma. In plasma, there are no electrons associated with a specific nucleus, so there are no electron energy states.

I'm not certain of the mechanism by which photons are absorbed by a plasma. I can just see that they are, being that stars aren't transparent, and that's all that's necessary here.