WC is entirely happy with his ignorance and has no problem displaying it proudly. He's basically the Tod Akin of the forum. He rather be wrong than educated, so I'm not sure why do you guys even bother, tbh...
Then please, by all means, show fault in my assessments.
You've been told already. The rest is just you being the usual ing idiot. *THAT* is why they shouldn't waste their time.
Then I missed it.
What specifically is wrong?
Learn to read, or use the search function. Or both.
The problem is that nothing they said matters.
Therefore, show me. Show me I'm wrong.
What is said that matters?
Would somebody please, take one point that matters to the calculation, and show why it's wrong. Just one. Don't bury it with other . Make it clear please.
Its in this thread. The fact that you can understand where it is while every other visitor to the thread can see it doesn't do much for your stance that you're not a ing idiot.
Well, here are two more guys that say you are an idiot. That makes 5 so far. Zero for the "WC is not an idiot" team.
It's like the first minute of a Spurs/Blazers game.
Apparently, nothing anybody says matter to you. More reason not to waste time with you.
Yeah, I guess consideration of the spectrum of photons incident on the earth after being perturbed by asteroid dust isn't important to this discussion after all. Thanks for helping as all see the light WC. Pun intended.
So am I tbh. I was succored into a discussion of thermodynamics with the likes of you. Makes me feel as if I owe everyone an apology for junking up the forum with 2 pages of your crap.
Please submit your apology on the label of a Shiner Bock and pass it to me.
Yeah, I guess consideration of the spectrum of photons incident on the earth after being perturbed by asteroid dust isn't important to this discussion after all. Thanks for helping as all see the light WC. Pun intended.
So am I tbh. I was succored into a discussion of thermodynamics with the likes of you. Makes me feel as if I owe everyone an apology for junking up the forum with 2 pages of your crap.
Thx.
Agloco.
You still never answered my question, and I can't help but think what ever you see, is something I know is wrong. Like I said, not arguments had any merit outside of minor effects.
This dust cloud. Just how do you think it will alter the spectra enough to matter? It seems to me that it will reduce all wavelengths equally. Heat up some, and then radiate a very weak IR in all directions, including back to the sun. Not enough to worry about. How am I wrong here?
I addressed the fact the most the radiative changes in flow patterns will be 98.3% of what they were. I acknowledged not all are near linear, but the primary effects are near linear to input. Just not linear to other variables. Because of this, the final forcing will be about 98.3% as before the dish cloud. The total radiative forcing in the atmosphere is about 520 watts/sq meter, and about 390 watts/sq meter of downward forcing. If you wish to only use this 390 number, 1.7% changes it by about 6.6 watts/sq meter. Four times the warming the AGW crowd claims. This is my concern. This 1.7% ends up being so much more than needed.
Again, I ask for what is specifically wrong in my assessment. I have not seen anything that affects the primary factor I speak of, and the lesser factors account for maybe 1/5th of the changes.
Trust me.
What ever you guys are laughing about, it is over shadowed by the 1.7% change alone.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 10-08-2012 at 03:42 PM.
It's not like anyone is forgetting the posts he and I have made. You can sit there and pretend like that hasn't been asked if it makes you feel better.
We both are waiting for a justification in using a simplified genous blackbody in equilibrium to describe the thermodynamic behavior of the Earth.
He has been asking for a justification for that from the beginning as have I.
Once you get past that we can address your other assumptions/methods but that is an excellent starting point and its one ing thing for your simple mind to have to deal with.
Respond to it, toolbag.
I am not using it. If you read carefully, I assumed it might be a mistake the authors used. I only pointed out the end result of 1 degree that the 1.7% would make if that was their thought. This is based on the difference that the earth would be 255 K without an atmosphere and this number changes by about 1 degree from a 1.7% change. Emissivity doesn't matter in this because it cancels itself out between the two numbers if it remains constant.
Because like always, you brought up factors that simply do not matter. we are not going though any state changes, all other factors are equal and cancel each other out, except at very low levels. The primary factor will be linked proportionally to the 1.7%.
Maybe I just see no need to calculate variables that effectively cancel each other out.
Again, i ask. What specifically do you disagree with in my assessment, so i can address it. Not of your is sticking in my view.
Agloco 5
Wild Cobra 7
For everyone else, here is what WC actually said. It should be clear that the only calculations that actually did were on the basis of the dumbed down thermodynamics as has been explained. Since that time he has been arguing back and forth about his failure in napkin math. Whoops on the decimal point. So not only did he do those calculations using the dumbed down version but he also defended his arithmetic up in doing so.
Now he is saying that he did not do this but would should be clear from reading the above, he clearly did and much more.
i think it will be found that the above is the case.
dis·sem·ble (d-smbl)
v. dis·sem·bled, dis·sem·bling, dis·sem·bles
v.tr.
1. To disguise or conceal behind a false appearance. See Synonyms at disguise.
2. To make a false show of; feign.
v.intr.
To disguise or conceal one's real nature, motives, or feelings behind a false appearance.
Now what i will do is ask the idiot what his other calculations are and what formulas he is using to justify his current stance of "I don't have to consider those variables because they cancel each other out." I think we will get the same treatment as before in asking what formulas he was using to justify his initial position ie never show the formulas or logic and posturing.
So:
Dumbass, please justify the comment about the variables canceling each other out.
I am happy to have created this thread. carry on.
FuzzyLumpkins 6
lulz
I thought you'd care
How do you score yourself?
What i am curious to know is how he figures a 4th order polynomial is a linear operation.
What do line mean?
His is so full of ignorant fail it's sad. I reread his stuff and I can understand why he ws diagnosed with a learning disability. you can see where he is limited in anything beyond cause and effect relationships. i wonder if he even understands quadratics.
No one really cares about the assumptions of someone who's completely unqualified to make an assessment to begin with.
Its just stupid that he's saying they ed up and he has no idea how to do the calculations himself to figure out the Earth's temp.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
