Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 301 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#52680 07/29/14 03:30 PM
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
paul Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
an observation of the results of having too much CO2 in the
atmosphere of a planet.

Mars atmosphere consist of 96 % CO2 !!



but the temperatures on mars are all FROZEN SOLID



why do all the supposedly but most likely and most
obviously like minded peer proclaimed intelligent
global warming alarmist tend to believe or at least
agree that CO2 is a global warming gas?

when it is so vividly displayed on the planet Mars that
CO2 is a global cooling gas.

its like I said earlier, whatever they say , as long as
it is a main stream science article on climate , you can
just simply know that what they are saying is completely backwards.




3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
.
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Apples and Oranges?

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
paul Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
Apples and Oranges?


profiteering and financial gain?

unless theres a snowballs chance in hell that the CO2 on
mars is actually different from the CO2 on earth.

because we know that the sun is the same sun and
the amount of sun exposure is of a 24 hour day
with a 12 hour exposure time per day.

on the earth the light coming from the sun
( wide spectrum white light )
passes through the atmosphere containing CO2 because of
its wavelength then when the earth has absorbed the light
that it can absorb the remaining light is reflected off of
the surface of the earth as
( long wavelength low energy light) this reflected light is absorbed
by CO2 in the atmosphere and is re-emitted and retained
as heat in the earths atmosphere.

mars surface is dark.
its surface should absorb light.
on a winters day with temperatures in the 20's my
parked cars tires are really hot to the touch , so even
though the surface temperature of mars is really low
the suns ability to warm the surface layers of mars
enough to absorb light in order to reflect the long wave
light should not present a problem.

so , why hasn't / doesn't this same physical process occur
on mars as it occurs on the earth?

wouldn't it be a simple test to perform to find out if
CO2 is a global warming gas by simply putting a temperature
sensor and a replica of a planet to absorb and reflect
light inside a large weather balloon filled with CO2
and exposing that balloon to sun light?

has this simple test been performed?

you could even test the different proposed global
warming gasses to find if they cause the atmosphere
and thus the planet to warm or to cool.




3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
...or you could just do the calculations for Mars, the same way we do for Earth:

http://www.atmos.washington.edu/2002Q4/211/notes_greenhouse.html
Quote:
We calculated the effective radiating temperature for Earth in class, as summarized in the above notes. Let's do the same for Mars.
Here is the information we have:
the albedo on Mars is A = 0.22,
and the solar flux reaching Mars is equal to 593 W/m2.
Gosh Paul, "Solar radiation incident on the Earth's disk [is] (1370 Watts per square meter)...."

That difference, between 1370 and 593 Watts, might be a factor to consider also.

...as well as the huge difference in atmospheric pressures, for each planet.
===

But, do you know for sure that the CO2 on Mars hasn't made Mars warmer (than Mars would be without the CO2) ...like greenhouse gases do...
Quote:
This effective temperature of 255 K is the temperature the Earth's Surface would have if it didn't have an atmosphere. It would be awfully cold! In reality, the Earth's surface temperature is closer to 288 K (15 C, 59 F). This difference of 33 K is the magnitude of the greenhouse effect.
...here on Earth.

~


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
P
Member
Offline
Member
P
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 84
samwik,

So the thickness of the atmosphere and the distance from the sun make a difference...amazing.

Since the inverse square law applies, newton should be thrilled.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
paul Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
WOW , I never knew it was that simple of a calculation.

Quote:
Based on the planetary energy balance applied to Mars, the solar radiation reaching the planet's surface must be equal to the infrared energy emitted by the planet:


LOL laugh

so we have nothing to worry about because the only
way the energy balance can change is if the solar radiation
either increases or decreases.

since the solar radiation will enter mars atmosphere because
of its wavelength , then does the thickness of the atmosphere
really count as a element?

96% of CO2 should equate to an almost impenetrable layer of
CO2 that should trap all the heat that enters the mars atmosphere.

so do you really think that earths 0.04% CO2 would have
any opportunity to trap any heat at all even though it is really thick compared to the thin mars atmosphere?

and were not talking about height here because the martian
atmosphere is actually taller that the earths, and the
molecular weight of the martian atmosphere is apx 50% heavier than the earths atmosphere so when someone says thick they actually mean dense , correct?

here we go then , I found a test that shows that CO2
is a global cooling gas , not a global warming gas.

and as predicted the science behind the global warming hype is exactly backwards.















3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,858
Did you happen to notice the part about how much energy Mars receives from the Sun compared to the amount the Earth receives?

Bill Gill


C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
paul Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
yes Bill , I did notice that.

Quote:
Mars, which is further away, receives 43% less solar flux than the Earth.


that is 593 Watts per square meter of surface area.

apx 5000 BTU (according to my 5000 BTU window air conditioner)

but wait theres more because according to the global warming
scam the 6.7 mile high thick or dense atmosphere consisting of
96% CO2 on mars should effectively cause all of that heat to
become locked up into the atmosphere.

and not only that , WOW , its also bounced back and forth
between the surface of mars and the CO2 atmosphere causing
a proposed greenhouse effect that has obviously melted mars
already.


because heat is additive.

the heat cant escape so its still there , for billions of
years the heat has been building up in mars atmosphere and
transferring into the entirety of mars itself.

a total meltdown , but only if you actually believe that
the proposed greenhouse effect is caused by CO2.

otherwise mars should be a really cold place.

which it happens to be really cold on mars.





3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
paul Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
I found another good video that makes sense.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokW
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5