Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Those of us who have studied the earth sciences know the earth is warmed by three sources. Primarily the sun, then tidal forces and internal nuclear radiation.

    This may be of interest for discussion:

    Surf zones warmed from within : Nature News & Comment

    It's an October 15 article out of Nature. Here is one passage:

    The analysis showed that waves were packing much more heat than the team had expected: roughly one-quarter the amount coming from the southern California sunlight. Furthermore, they calculate that in places with stronger waves and cloudier skies — such as the US Pacific Northwest — wave heating could be nearly three times stronger than the energy imparted by the Sun.
    They reference this:

    The Surfzone Heat Budget: The Effect of Wave Heating - Sinnett - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

    Abstract

    Surfzone incident wave energy flux is dissipated by wave-breaking which through viscosity generates heat. This effect is not present in shelf heat budgets, and has not previously been considered. Pier-based observations of water temperature in 1–4 m depth, meteorology and waves are used to test a surfzone heat budget, which closes on diurnal and longer time-scales. Wave energy flux is the second most variable term with mean contribution 1/4 of the mean short-wave radiation. The heat-budget residual has semi-diurnal and higher frequency variability and net cooling. Cross-shore advective heat flux driven by internal wave events, rip currents and undertow contribute to this residual variability and net cooling. In locations with large waves, steeper beaches or less solar radiation, the ratio of wave energy flux to short-wave radiation may be >1.
    It appears CO2 may have another contender, which could put CO2 in 4th place.

    1) Solar

    2) Soot on ice

    3) Tidal energy

    4) CO2

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514


    AGW denier!

  3. #3
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Are you now calling Nature a denier publication?

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Are you now calling Nature a denier publication?
    no, I'm calling you a AGW denier.

    co2/methane trap heat that clearly warms the air, land, water, duh. Your beloved soot is from BigCarbon processes, how to separate soot from CO2 emissions?

    etc, etc, etc.

    How much does BigCarbon pay you to shill for them?

  5. #5
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    no, I'm calling you a AGW denier.
    Yes, your cult like mentality would.

    co2/methane trap heat that clearly warms the air, land, water, duh.
    No Sherlock. However, I have always maintained, and recent studies confirm that CO2 does not warm as much as claimed. Nether does CH4.

    See: http://www.scipublish.com/journals/A...d/3001-846.pdf

    Your beloved soot is from BigCarbon processes, how to separate soot from CO2 emissions?
    That's easy. Soot is an aerosol that can be scrubbed out of the emissions. We have converted most of the US fossil fuel burning facilities to scrub it out and all new ones do. It's Asia, primarily China that is the problem. Their released soot is picked up by the polar cells and deposited on the northern ice, causing the melting in the warmer months to accelerate, and decelerates the rebuilding on the colder months. With the extra exposed sea, the norther ocean warms more causing more problems yet.

    How much does BigCarbon pay you to shill for them?
    You keep proving yourself a Joker.

  6. #6
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    In what ways does solar energy interact with the Earth to heat the Earth Cobra?
    Why is it that Mercury has an atmosphere that is cooler than Venus even though Mercury is much closer to the Sun?

    Work your way back please. Since you know so much about science.

  7. #7
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    In what ways does solar energy interact with the Earth to heat the Earth Cobra?
    It's the primary energy source to produce the earths heat. An earth with no atmoshere would have an average approximate 255 kelvin (-18 C) temperature. Greenhouse gasses act as a blanket, and since the energy is somewhat trapped, the earth warms to an approximate 288 kelvin (15 C).

    Link:

    http://people.duke.edu/~ad159/files/p112/15.pdf

  8. #8
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    It's the primary energy source to produce the earths heat. An earth with no atmoshere would have an average approximate 255 kelvin (-18 C) temperature. Greenhouse gasses act as a blanket, and since the energy is somewhat trapped, the earth warms to an approximate 288 kelvin (15 C).

    Link:

    http://people.duke.edu/~ad159/files/p112/15.pdf
    So the atmosphere is very important.
    Do the types of gases that make up the atmosphere matter?

  9. #9
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    So the atmosphere is very important.
    Do the types of gases that make up the atmosphere matter?
    Absolutely. First, to animal life, we have the oxygen need. To sustain plant life, we need CO2. I suspect evolution would have taken different angles to life if the atmospheric mix was different, but we have evolved to need the approximate 20% oxygen and 0.03%+ CO2.

    All these gasses are grey body absorber/emitters that respond to specific spectra. Water is the primary greenhouse gas, absorbing the largest portion of the long wave radiation, and a significant portion of the shortwave energy as well.

  10. #10
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    And so tidal energy has increased drastically over the past 100 years?

  11. #11
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    Absolutely. First, to animal life, we have the oxygen need. To sustain plant life, we need CO2. I suspect evolution would have taken different angles to life if the atmospheric mix was different, but we have evolved to need the approximate 20% oxygen and 0.03%+ CO2.

    All these gasses are grey body absorber/emitters that respond to specific spectra. Water is the primary greenhouse gas, absorbing the largest portion of the long wave radiation, and a significant portion of the shortwave energy as well.
    Yet you choose to add tidal energy to the list because...

  12. #12
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    Absolutely. First, to animal life, we have the oxygen need. To sustain plant life, we need CO2. I suspect evolution would have taken different angles to life if the atmospheric mix was different, but we have evolved to need the approximate 20% oxygen and 0.03%+ CO2.

    All these gasses are grey body absorber/emitters that respond to specific spectra. Water is the primary greenhouse gas, absorbing the largest portion of the long wave radiation, and a significant portion of the shortwave energy as well.
    So so we look closely at changes in the types of gases in the Earth's atmosphere because...

  13. #13
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    So so we look closely at changes in the types of gases in the Earth's atmosphere because...
    LOL...

    Why are you playing this game?

    Because they change the feedback amplification from the solar energy. More H2O means more absorption and emission of radiant energy. Same with CO2, CH4, N2O, etc.

  14. #14
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    LOL...

    Why are you playing this game?

    Because they change the feedback amplification from the solar energy. More H2O means more absorption and emission of radiant energy. Same with CO2, CH4, N2O, etc.
    Tides, it's all in the tides...

    Keep brining in insignificant tangents, hope it's something else.
    Why do you continually do this?
    Look at your list, it's laughable. So yes, lol...

  15. #15
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Tides, it's all in the tides...

    Keep brining in insignificant tangents, hope it's something else.
    Why do you continually do this?
    Look at your list, it's laughable. So yes, lol...
    I believe the tides are insignificant myself, but I haven't researched anything to quantify them. I was hoping someone would find something of significance, but it appears instead, it just called out trolls like you.

    I take it the little comparisons the link states is just among the immediate region of coasts. I would laugh if they meant global levels.

  16. #16
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,153
    It appears CO2 may have another contender, which could put CO2 in 4th place.

    1) Solar

    2) Soot on ice

    3) Tidal energy

    4) CO2
    Insignificant ahead of any greenhouse gases. Currently thought to be the major reason of a statistical significant rise in global temps in the last 100-150 years.
    Gotcha Mr. Science...
    Those of us who know... Nothing? Those of us who have studied the Earth sciences...


    Seriously. Damn.
    Last edited by pgardn; 10-22-2014 at 10:38 PM.

  17. #17
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Insignificant ahead of any greenhouse gases. Currently thought to be the major reason of a statistical significant rise in global temps in the last 100-150 years.
    Gotcha Mr. Science...
    Those of us who know... Nothing? Those of us who have studied the Earth sciences...


    Seriously. Damn.
    As I explained in post 15, it would really be faryher down in my opinion, but I'm open to it being greater than CO2. I just don't see it being true, but threw it out any way.

  18. #18
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Those of us who have studied the earth sciences know the earth is warmed by three sources. Primarily the sun, then tidal forces and internal nuclear radiation.

    This may be of interest for discussion:

    Surf zones warmed from within : Nature News & Comment

    It's an October 15 article out of Nature. Here is one passage:



    They reference this:

    The Surfzone Heat Budget: The Effect of Wave Heating - Sinnett - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library



    It appears CO2 may have another contender, which could put CO2 in 4th place.

    1) Solar

    2) Soot on ice

    3) Tidal energy

    4) CO2

    The perennial conclusion in search of evidence, cherry picked by hand.



    So let me know if your reading of these theories led you to the tidal energy equilibrium value, and if tidal energy is increasing over time or decreasing over the last 250 years.
    Do tell.

  19. #19
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Those of us who have studied the earth sciences know the earth is warmed by three sources. Primarily the sun, then tidal forces and internal nuclear radiation.

    This may be of interest for discussion:

    Surf zones warmed from within : Nature News & Comment

    It's an October 15 article out of Nature. Here is one passage:



    They reference this:

    The Surfzone Heat Budget: The Effect of Wave Heating - Sinnett - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library



    It appears CO2 may have another contender, which could put CO2 in 4th place.

    1) Solar

    2) Soot on ice

    3) Tidal energy

    4) CO2
    Surf zones warmed from within
    Friction in breaking waves has been an overlooked source of heat in coastal waters.
    The analysis showed that waves were packing much more heat than the team had expected: roughly one-quarter the amount coming from the southern California sunlight. Furthermore, they calculate that in places with stronger waves and cloudier skies — such as the US Pacific Northwest — wave heating could be nearly three times stronger than the energy imparted by the Sun.
    Such a great article.

    Let see how your substandard critical thinking skills mangled an appropriate conclusion, based on this evidence.

    Tell me, WC, what percentage of the worlds oceans are in "coastal waters" as defined by this study?

  20. #20
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Such a great article.

    Let see how your substandard critical thinking skills mangled an appropriate conclusion, based on this evidence.

    Tell me, WC, what percentage of the worlds oceans are in "coastal waters" as defined by this study?
    What the is wrong with you?

    Please look up the definitions of "would" and "could."

    Why are you such a ing ignorant asshole? Is it your substandard critical thinking skills that lead you to ASSume?

    Did you read post 17?

  21. #21
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    What the is wrong with you?

    Please look up the definitions of "would" and "could."

    Why are you such a ing ignorant asshole? Is it your substandard critical thinking skills that lead you to ASSume?

    Did you read post 17?
    Not really, I had time to read the first post and link before lunch was up. I am guilty of not having enough time. Mea culpa.

    It took me just a few seconds to find the flaw in the OP, and I spent more time looking for a funny picture having to do with poop than bothering with your followups.

    The only thing I really assumed was that you meant what you said, when you posted:

    It appears CO2 may have another contender, which could put CO2 in 4th place.

    1) Solar

    2) Soot on ice

    3) Tidal energy

    4) CO2
    So either you figured out how stupid that was shortly after you posted it and walked it back, or you were essentially lying about what you thought in the OP.

    I really can't tell which. Perhaps you could enlighten me, which was it, stupid or lying?
    Last edited by RandomGuy; 10-23-2014 at 09:55 PM.

  22. #22
    I play pretty, no? TeyshaBlue's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Post Count
    13,319
    Not really, I had time to read the first post and link before lunch was up. I am guilty of not having enough time. Mea culpa.

    It took me just a few seconds to find the flaw in the OP, and I spent more time looking for a funny picture having to do with poop than bothering with your followups.

    The only thing I really assumed was that you meant what you said, when you posted:



    So either you figured out how stupid that was shortly after you posted it and walked it back, or you were essentially lying about what you thought in the OP.

    I really can't tell which. Perhaps you could enlighten me, which was it, stupid or lying?
    Yes.

  23. #23
    I am that guy RandomGuy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    50,672
    Classic WC.

    Moving on...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •