A GW question for Manny

[Wild Cobra]

Manny, I'm curious. If CO2 is the culprit for the climate change we see, then how do you explain the extent of the energy budget loss of 0.9 watts/sq. meter into the oceans?

Let me remind you. Solar energy penetrates the ocean deep. LW from the downward 333 number is probably absorbed in the vapor above the water, and only causes more evaporation rather than any appreciable increase the water temperature. What little makes it to the water is still only heating the very top surface. Again, just more precipitation.

Also, do you know of any sources that provide a number for H2O LW absorption vs. ppm or percentage that can be compared to CO2?

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Global%20Warming/globalenergyflow.jpg

[MannyIsGod]

I explain it by pointing out that your understanding of thermodynamics is still extremely poor (not to mention LW radiation and optics). EXTREMELY bad.

[MannyIsGod]

P.S. Did you really need another thread where I mock your ridiculous questions and poor understanding of science? Wasn't one enough?

[Wild Cobra]

I explain it by pointing out that your understanding of thermodynamics is still extremely poor (not to mention LW radiation and optics). EXTREMELY bad.
No.

You only said I didn't understand, which is false.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Some radiation is reflected or refracts a bit before reflecting out so therefor none of it actually warms the ocean. Don't you know anything MiG?

[Wild Cobra]

P.S. Did you really need another thread where I mock your ridiculous questions and poor understanding of science? Wasn't one enough?
Can you answer the questions, or not?

[MannyIsGod]

I tell you want though. I will play along nicely if you provide some proof for this statement you made:


Solar energy penetrates the ocean deep.

Do so in the context of the breakdown of the solar emission spectrum. In other words, at the largest and most substantive wavelengths of solar radiation that reach the earth's surface show me that it penetrates into the deep ocean.

[MannyIsGod]

Dupe.

[Wild Cobra]

I tell you want though. I will play along nicely if you provide some proof for this statement you made:


Solar energy penetrates the ocean deep.

Do so in the context of the breakdown of the solar emission spectrum. In other words, at the largest and most substantive wavelengths of solar radiation that reach the earth's surface show me that it penetrates into the deep ocean.Light is solar energy, and reaches depths relatively deeper than longwave does. At some point, the ocean is dark, as all the light is absorbed. This is a far greater amount of energy than what LW can achieve to the ocean.

I said deep into the ocean, not the deep ocean.

I was speaking in a relative way.

[MannyIsGod]

Can you answer the questions, or not?

I can point out the flaws in your questions which render your questions moot.

You see, I could ask to explain why gravity pushes us out to space but the question would make no sense since gravity does not push us out to space.

Thats basically what you're doing on many fronts.

[MannyIsGod]

Light is solar energy, and reaches depths relatively deeper than longwave does. At some point, the ocean is dark, as all the light is absorbed. This is a far greater amount of energy than what LW can achieve to the ocean.

I said deep into the ocean, not the deep ocean.

I was speaking in a relative way.

Um, relative to what? Relative to a bathtub, light might penetrate deep. Relative to the ocean? Is it deep? At what point is the ocean dark? And I asked for you to provide proof provide proof.

[Wild Cobra]

I can point out the flaws in your questions which render your questions moot.

You see, I could ask to explain why gravity pushes us out to space but the question would make no sense since gravity does not push us out to space.

Thats basically what you're doing on many fronts.

Do you not understand the intent of my question?

[Wild Cobra]

Um, relative to what? Relative to a bathtub, light might penetrate deep. Relative to the ocean? Is it deep? At what point is the ocean dark? And I asked for you to provide proof provide proof.
SW vs. LW.

[MannyIsGod]

You have my request. If you want me to post any further in this thread you will meet it.

[Wild Cobra]

You have my request. If you want me to post any further in this thread you will meet it.
You mean this?

Um, relative to what? Relative to a bathtub, light might penetrate deep. Relative to the ocean? Is it deep? At what point is the ocean dark? And I asked for you to provide proof provide proof.
I'm not going to look up the depth at which there is no more light penetration, but it is much farther than infrared penetration, especially the CO2 bands. It is somewhere around 1/2 mile deep that light penetrates before it is all absorbed. Are you going to suggest that radiant energy from CO2 gets lost in the deeper waters like visible light?

Infrared stays at the surface, because it is more readily absorbed. Being in the surface, it is then plays little or no change in ocean warming as it just creates more precipitation.

[Wild Cobra]

Even though this is for fresh water, the concept applies:

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x262/Wild_Cobra/Global%20Warming/H2Owaterabsorptionspectra.jpg (http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/vibrat.html)

According to wiki, which of course is not always right, there is light in the ocean until we reach the about 1000 meters. Will you claim that above surface IR extends any where near that depth?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There are thermal layers and shit tonnes of chlorophyll. It gets tiring having him dumb shit down so he can attempt to understand it.

[MannyIsGod]

No significant water penetrates past 200m in the ocean. Its not a hard fact to find yet you made a stupid claim that light penetrates deep into the ocean because you love pulling shit out of your ass. There's a reason its called the photic zone.

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/light_travel.html

Now, I don't even want to get back into your piss poor BASIC thermodynamics of "its only heating the top portion of the ocean". When you have a system in equilibrium and you heat one portion, it doesn't magically stay confined to that one part of the system.

To top it off, in one thread you're ranting and raving how H20 is a huge factor in the GHE and in the other you're saying how the CO2 contribution is OK because its (you're incorrect on this end but you can't even logically connect your own bullshit) just evaporating more water.

[Wild Cobra]

No significant water penetrates past 200m in the ocean. Its not a hard fact to find yet you made a stupid claim that light penetrates deep into the ocean because you love pulling shit out of your ass. There's a reason its called the photic zone.

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/light_travel.html

Now, I don't even want to get back into your piss poor BASIC thermodynamics of "its only heating the top portion of the ocean". When you have a system in equilibrium and you heat one portion, it doesn't magically stay confined to that one part of the system.

To top it off, in one thread you're ranting and raving how H20 is a huge factor in the GHE and in the other you're saying how the CO2 contribution is OK because its (you're incorrect on this end but you can't even logically connect your own bullshit) just evaporating more water.
You said things I know. The 200 meters is the approximate limit of enough light for photosynthesis. Light still makes it down to about 1000 meters. My point is, almost all visible light is absorbed deep enough, that the energy doesn't all return to surface or atmosphere. Almost all the long wave that makes it to the water, returns to the atmosphere.

Yes, I know about thermodynamics, and I know the heat moves around, is converted to work, etc. I have made the point that this delta energy moves. It isn't lost, only converted when it's no longer a temperature variable. That which makes it to the deeper layers, takes hundreds of years to be seen again. It doesn't magically disappear in the deep.

As for the H2O difference, you really need to increase your understanding. I was saying it makes a big difference with large temperature changes. We were at that point discussing coming out of the ice age. CO2 could not be responsible alone, when H2O is such a stronger greenhouse gas, and it changes with atmospheric temperature. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 change primarily with the ocean temperature.The temperature changes in CO2 is no comparison to larger changes that the effect of H2O in the atmosphere has. It has it's own positive feedback.

[ElNono]

Do you not understand the intent of my question?

This is when you know he cornered himself (again) :lmao

[MannyIsGod]

You said things I know. The 200 meters is the approximate limit of enough light for photosynthesis. Light still makes it down to about 1000 meters. My point is, almost all visible light is absorbed deep enough, that the energy doesn't all return to surface or atmosphere. Almost all the long wave that makes it to the water, returns to the atmosphere.

Yes, I know about thermodynamics, and I know the heat moves around, is converted to work, etc. I have made the point that this delta energy moves. It isn't lost, only converted when it's no longer a temperature variable. That which makes it to the deeper layers, takes hundreds of years to be seen again. It doesn't magically disappear in the deep.

As for the H2O difference, you really need to increase your understanding. I was saying it makes a big difference with large temperature changes. We were at that point discussing coming out of the ice age. CO2 could not be responsible alone, when H2O is such a stronger greenhouse gas, and it changes with atmospheric temperature. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 change primarily with the ocean temperature.The temperature changes in CO2 is no comparison to larger changes that the effect of H2O in the atmosphere has. It has it's own positive feedback.

:lmao @ those first two comments.

Your last paragraph is hillarious. Yes, WC. Water vapor is considered a positive feedback. I'm not sure what your point is as this is not a debated point but rather a tenet of AGW theory.

[possessed]

So, this is what people do in their spare time? Study environmental sciences so they can score points during message board arguments....

Any of you nerds have an active sex life? I mean, really... Be honest.

[MannyIsGod]

Virgin TBH

[Wild Cobra]

Virgin TBH
Why doesn't that surprise me?

[RandomGuy]

You mean this?

I'm not going to look up the depth at which there is no more light penetration, but it is much farther than infrared penetration, especially the CO2 bands. It is somewhere around 1/2 mile deep that light penetrates before it is all absorbed. Are you going to suggest that radiant energy from CO2 gets lost in the deeper waters like visible light?

Infrared stays at the surface, because it is more readily absorbed. Being in the surface, it is then plays little or no change in ocean warming as it just creates more precipitation.

300-500 feet in the ocean or so.

Fascinating footage:

If you skip ahead to about the 2:00 mark, he comments on how much light there is at about 300ft down.

Given the ocean has a lot of salt and critters absorbing light, I would imagine that the absorbtion rate of light is a lot higher than clear, pure h2O

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/46053890#46053890

400 feet is pretty dark.

[RandomGuy]

Even better:

http://www.biology.duke.edu/johnsenlab/pdfs/pubs/oceanus.pdf

Deep oceans are clearer than coastlines. Blue penetrates deeper than anything else a few hundred meters. Red is almost entirely absorbed in the first few feet. (see page 2)

UV about 100m or so.

[RandomGuy]

Better still, and also addresses the enormous heat sink capacity of the ocean:

http://oceansjsu.com/105d/exped_briny/1.html

(skip ahead to question 12 for that)

[CosmicCowboy]

As a cowboy and fisherman I can tell you that sunlight warms the water of the ocean and the more/hotter you get the warmer the oceans get. When I fish offshore in the gulf in August the water is 20 degrees warmer than it was in February.

[CosmicCowboy]

As a diver, the visible spectrum is pretty damn dark at 100 feet.

[CosmicCowboy]

Also, somebody explain to WC how thermoclines affect the heat sink potential.

[TeyshaBlue]

Also, somebody explain to WC how thermoclines affect the heat sink potential.

Does that involve math? Cause math doesn't matter.

[Wild Cobra]

300-500 feet in the ocean or so.

Fascinating footage:

If you skip ahead to about the 2:00 mark, he comments on how much light there is at about 300ft down.

Given the ocean has a lot of salt and critters absorbing light, I would imagine that the absorbtion rate of light is a lot higher than clear, pure h2O

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/46053890#46053890

400 feet is pretty dark.
Yes, I know.

Manny keeps using tactics to avoid my points. My point is that there is still light being absorbed past that depth. Without accepting such facts, it is impossible to get a more complete understanding of the geosciences, which is needed for long term predictions of the earth climate.

[Agloco]

Yes, I know.

Manny keeps using tactics to avoid my points. My point is that there is still light being absorbed past that depth. Without accepting such facts, it is impossible to get a more complete understanding of the geosciences, which is needed for long term predictions of the earth climate.

Well, there's an exponential falloff in intensity with depth and that neglects the contribution of solutes to attenuation. So, that begs the question of significance.

How significant is the contribution (if any) of light absorption at depths greater than 400-500 ft?

[Wild Cobra]

Well, there's an exponential falloff in intensity with depth and that neglects the contribution of solutes to attenuation. So, that begs the question of significance.

How significant is the contribution (if any) of light absorption at depths greater than 400-500 ft?
It's pretty significant for the future when more energy is being collected by the earth, and we estimate it to be just under 1 watt/sq meter. Keep in mind, there is energy at shorter wavelength than visible light also at these depths. Water transmits blue light about 100 times easier than red light, and ultraviolet even better. All this energy ends up being absorbed one way or another until probably hundreds of years later. this is a trend that has been probably been occurring for a very pong time, since a balancing point is not reached. We know the sun has notable increases in intensity twice since the maunder minima. the most recent, about 1900 to 1950.

This whole energy balance is important to the earths warming and cooling cycles. The ocean plays a very important role as well. The AGW crowd seems to completely ignore some key aspects, probably because it destroys their agenda.

[Agloco]

It's pretty significant for the future when more energy is being collected by the earth, and we estimate it to be just under 1 watt/sq meter. Keep in mind, there is energy at shorter wavelength than visible light also at these depths. Water transmits blue light about 100 times easier than red light, and ultraviolet even better. All this energy ends up being absorbed one way or another until probably hundreds of years later. this is a trend that has been probably been occurring for a very pong time, since a balancing point is not reached. We know the sun has notable increases in intensity twice since the maunder minima. the most recent, about 1900 to 1950.

This whole energy balance is important to the earths warming and cooling cycles. The ocean plays a very important role as well. The AGW crowd seems to completely ignore some key aspects, probably because it destroys their agenda.

It does? Is any of this energy dissipated or is all of this excess being deposited into a closed system?

[TeyshaBlue]

lol...blue light batteries ftw.

[MannyIsGod]

http://images.wikia.com/marvelmovies/images/3/35/A_Cosmic_Cube.jpg

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It does? Is any of this energy dissipated or is all of this excess being deposited into a closed system?

i am pretty sure that this is just an extension of his 'the energy is being hidden in the deep ocean currents' argument.

It should be also noted that he been asked for quantification and not 'pretty significant.' He is always limited to supposing the qualities that he wants when an analysis asks for anything more difficult than primary school arithmetic.

[Wild Cobra]

It does? Is any of this energy dissipated or is all of this excess being deposited into a closed system?
What form do you mean by dissipated? There are several ways heat becomes work. In the end, there needs to be some balance.

Why does this matter?

Your AGW experts says this is happening. Can we get back to the original question, or do you guys want to block any request a skeptic has?

All you guys try to do is try to silence questions of skepticism, blinded by your religion of climate pseudoscience. Your faith is so strong, you will not listen to reason.

If CO2 is the culprit for the climate change we see, then how do you explain the extent of the energy budget loss of 0.9 watts/sq. meter into the oceans?

Let me remind you. Solar energy penetrates the ocean deep. LW from the downward 333 number is probably absorbed in the vapor above the water, and only causes more evaporation rather than any appreciable increase the water temperature. What little makes it to the water is still only heating the very top surface. Again, just more precipitation.

Also, do you know of any sources that provide a number for H2O LW absorption vs. ppm or percentage that can be compared to CO2?
This loss of 0.9 is not increasing in the atmosphere by that much. Such an annual rate would be a disaster

[MannyIsGod]

Why does this matter??!!?!

:lmao !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Please explain it Agloco. Please.

[RandomGuy]

Yes, I know.

Manny keeps using tactics to avoid my points. My point is that there is still light being absorbed past that depth. Without accepting such facts, it is impossible to get a more complete understanding of the geosciences, which is needed for long term predictions of the earth climate.

Better still, and also addresses the enormous heat sink capacity of the ocean:

http://oceansjsu.com/105d/exped_briny/1.html

(skip ahead to question 12 for that)

That HTML is for an online course about oceanography.

Were you to have bothered with it, it explains exactly how energy is absorbed, at what spectrums, depths, and effects on temperature.

You should spend some time listenign to the little mini lectures.

interesting course.

Of course, it is taught by someone with a PhD, and is all sciency and stuff.

The guy is probably in on the AGW scam, so it must be all propaganda.

Right?

[Wild Cobra]

Of course, it is taught by someone with a PhD, and is all sciency and stuff.

The guy is probably in on the AGW scam, so it must be all propaganda.

Right?
OMG...

No. I'm not jumping to such a conclusion without knowing more about him.

I know the intensity is minimal. Why are you guys fixating on the minimal levels?

Some solar energy makes it this deep, bot zero IR from downforcing makes it this far.

If I were to bother with it?

My God...

It's your incorrect assumption that I don't already know the basic facts outlined in that chapter 12.