What experiment was this?

 

This one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-w8Cyfoq8

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Religion is based on faith. 

 

Exactly!


 

You won't investigate the lies for yourself, you just take it on faith.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

This one:

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-w8Cyfoq8'>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-w8Cyfoq8</a>

Explain the flaws in his experiment.

---

Explain the flaws in his experiment.

 

First off, a scientist would know that the error in such an experiment totally swamps any temperature change from using CO2 instead of air. The glass in the bell jars absorbs most of the IR before it even reaches the CO2.


 

The actual lie is in the showing of the two thermometers (starting around 1:12). The two side by side thermometers are the exact same image with the blue alcohol line photoshopped in. WattsUpWithThat did an image comparison, and they were exactly the same pixel for pixel except for the blue line. The thermometer images were also taken from outside the bell jars, since you can see the distortion caused by the jar glass on the thermometers in the earlier wide angle photo.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

First off, a scientist would know that the error in such an experiment totally swamps any temperature change from using CO2 instead of air. The glass in the bell jars absorbs most of the IR before it even reaches the CO2.


The actual lie is in the showing of the two thermometers (starting around 1:12). The two side by side thermometers are the exact same image with the blue alcohol line photoshopped in. WattsUpWithThat did an image comparison, and they were exactly the same pixel for pixel except for the blue line. The thermometer images were also taken from outside the bell jars, since you can see the distortion caused by the jar glass on the thermometers in the earlier wide angle photo.

LOL yea the conspiracy spans as far as doctoring bill nye YouTube videos


-__-

---

First off, a scientist would know that the error in such an experiment totally swamps any temperature change from using CO2 instead of air. The glass in the bell jars absorbs most of the IR before it even reaches the CO2.


The actual lie is in the showing of the two thermometers (starting around 1:12). The two side by side thermometers are the exact same image with the blue alcohol line photoshopped in. WattsUpWithThat did an image comparison, and they were exactly the same pixel for pixel except for the blue line. The thermometer images were also taken from outside the bell jars, since you can see the distortion caused by the jar glass on the thermometers in the earlier wide angle photo.

1) You are making a lot of assumptions. First, depending on the glass type it will reflect some infrared light because the glass itself has a refractive index that is different from the air. It will also absorb some of the infrared light, but this is also dependent on the type of glass. The dessicators have a fairly thick glass but they are also transparent so they will retain some infrared energy but also allow some infrared to pass through. But the glass isn't why the temperature is rising in the dessicator with the CO2. The thermal properties of gaseous CO2 are why the temperature rises. This experiment is purely an illustration of the greenhouse effect. That is all. The greenhouse effect is due to absorbed thermal radiation on the earth being re-emitted back into the atmosphere. Certain gases such as carbon dioxide have the ability to absorb thermal radiation in the form of infrared radiation and re-emit back to the environment glcrraring a positive feedback loop. Carbon thus acts as a thermal insulator. I believe you have a poor understanding of the greenhouse effect, which is all this experiment is demonstrating. How it relates to Climate Change? Well the emission of greenhouse gases by humans is thought to be strongly correlated with accelerated (the rate of change) climate change. 



<a class="bbc_url" href='https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation'>https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation</a>

---

1) You are making a lot of assumptions. First, depending on the glass type it will reflect some infrared light because the glass itself has a refractive index that is different from the air. It will also absorb some of the infrared light, but this is also dependent on the type of glass. The dessicators have a fairly thick glass but they are also transparent so they will retain some infrared energy but also allow some infrared to pass through. But the glass isn't why the temperature is rising in the dessicator with the CO2. The thermal properties of gaseous CO2 are why the temperature rises. This experiment is purely an illustration of the greenhouse effect. That is all. The greenhouse effect is due to absorbed thermal radiation on the earth being re-emitted back into the atmosphere. Certain gases such as carbon dioxide have the ability to absorb thermal radiation in the form of infrared radiation and re-emit back to the environment glcrraring a positive feedback loop. Carbon thus acts as a thermal insulator. I believe you have a poor understanding of the greenhouse effect, which is all this experiment is demonstrating. How it relates to Climate Change? Well the emission of greenhouse gases by humans is thought to be strongly correlated with accelerated (the rate of change) climate change. 



<a class="bbc_url" href='https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation'>https://scied.ucar.edu/carbon-dioxide-absorbs-and-re-emits-infrared-radiation</a>

 

You apparently didn't bother to read read what I wrote. I understand how CO2 absorbs IR. That has never been a point of disagreement. Maybe Daily Kos claims that, but it's not the case. Skeptics of all types, even those who totally discount any greenhouse effect of CO2 (of which I'm not one) still agree that CO2 absorbs in the IR.


The point is that the effect in that small amount of CO2 is swamped by the differences in the glass (among other things). The IR region where CO2 does most of its absorbing is the same region where glass absorbs CO2. This is why CO2 lasers use windows made of NaCl or KCl.


 

And you didn't comment on the most important part, the flagrant lie by Bill Nye in the thermometer display.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

You apparently didn't bother to read read what I wrote. I understand how CO2 absorbs IR. That has never been a point of disagreement. Maybe Daily Kos claims that, but it's not the case. Skeptics of all types, even those who totally discount any greenhouse effect of CO2 (of which I'm not one) still agree that CO2 absorbs in the IR.


The point is that the effect in that small amount of CO2 is swamped by the differences in the glass (among other things). The IR region where CO2 does most of its absorbing is the same region where glass absorbs CO2. This is why CO2 lasers use windows made of NaCl or KCl.


And you didn't comment on the most important part, the flagrant lie by Bill Nye in the thermometer display.

What do you mean is swamped by the small amount of CO2? What is swamped by what? What do you mean IR region? IR Is a region within the EM spectrum, containing long wavelengths. Do you mean the band intervals that CO2 absorbs at? What is the band interval of glass? Even if you could give me a answer not all glasses are created equally.Do you know what the composition of dessicator glass is or the amount of CO2 pumped into these containers a priori?

---

What do you mean is swamped by the small amount of CO2? What is swamped by what? What do you mean IR region? IR Is a region within the EM spectrum, containing long wavelengths. Do you mean the band intervals that CO2 absorbs at? What is the band interval of glass? Even if you could give me a answer not all glasses are created equally.Do you know what the composition of dessicator glass is or the amount of CO2 pumped into these containers a priori?

 

Are you really a scientist?


 

The warming effect of CO2 is swamped by the warming effect of IR absorption by the glass. Are you claiming that a special glass was used that allows IR to pass? The other components of the experiment are just cheap off-the-shelf stuff, I doubt Bill Nye sprung for an expensive glass jar that passes all IR, even if such a thing existed. If such a glass existed they would use it on CO2 lasers.


 

The amount of CO2 along the exit path of the IR in the Earth's atmosphere is orders of magnitude greater than that in the jar, and it still doesn't absorb 100% of the IR in its absorption spectrum. If it did then there would be no effect from additional CO2 and the whole Global Warming argument would fall apart. Any IR that gets through the glass will probably not be absorbed by the small path length of CO2 in the jar, most will just pass through.


 

Consider how CO2 absorption works. Even if some IR got through the glass and were absorbed by the CO2, the gas does not get hotter (unlike the glass), only the vibration state of the CO2 molecules is changed. Eventually the CO2 re-emits the same wavelength it absorbed. In the case of the planet, some of that is directed back down to the ground, which creates an additional downward radiation and (all other things being equal) increases the surface temperature. In the jar, if the wavelength gets through to begin with the re-radiation will just leave the jar. Some is absorbed by the "planet" in the jar and doesn't escape. This is negligible compared to (1) the effect of IR absorption by the jar, (2) the difference in IR input from two different lamps at not exactly the same distance, and (3) even the different absorption by the model earth.


 

Even if the experiment could actually work the fact is that Bill Nye falsified his presentation, just as NASA lied about the acceleration in sea level rise. How many lies do you need before you start questioning the dogma?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Are you really a scientist?


The warming effect of CO2 is swamped by the warming effect of IR absorption by the glass. Are you claiming that a special glass was used that allows IR to pass? The other components of the experiment are just cheap off-the-shelf stuff, I doubt Bill Nye sprung for an expensive glass jar that passes all IR, even if such a thing existed. If such a glass existed they would use it on CO2 lasers.


The amount of CO2 along the exit path of the IR in the Earth's atmosphere is orders of magnitude greater than that in the jar, and it still doesn't absorb 100% of the IR in its absorption spectrum. If it did then there would be no effect from additional CO2 and the whole Global Warming argument would fall apart. Any IR that gets through the glass will probably not be absorbed by the small path length of CO2 in the jar, most will just pass through.


Consider how CO2 absorption works. Even if some IR got through the glass and were absorbed by the CO2, the gas does not get hotter (unlike the glass), only the vibration state of the CO2 molecules is changed. Eventually the CO2 re-emits the same wavelength it absorbed. In the case of the planet, some of that is directed back down to the ground, which creates an additional downward radiation and (all other things being equal) increases the surface temperature. In the jar, if the wavelength gets through to begin with the re-radiation will just leave the jar. Some is absorbed by the "planet" in the jar and doesn't escape. This is negligible compared to (1) the effect of IR absorption by the jar, (2) the difference in IR input from two different lamps at not exactly the same distance, and (3) even the different absorption by the model earth.


Even if the experiment could actually work the fact is that Bill Nye falsified his presentation, just as NASA lied about the acceleration in sea level rise. How many lies do you need before you start questioning the dogma?

Is swamped a new scientific term? What the hell are you talking about? Nothing you are saying makes the slightest lick of sense. If you were on the physics forum you would get thoroughly embarrassed.

---

Is swamped a new scientific term? What the hell are you talking about? Nothing you are saying makes the slightest lick of sense. If you were on the physics forum you would get thoroughly embarrassed.

 

Now I need to define "swamped" for you? Or are you just so lost in your religion that you are forced to complain about a single word?


 

Since you don't know what "swamped" means, substitute the word "overwhelmed."


 

Or to clarify even further, the warming due to absorption by the glass is orders of magnitude greater than absorption by CO2.


 

And if you don't understand what I wrote you need to go back to Physics 101.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Now I need to define "swamped" for you? Or are you just so lost in your religion that you are forced to complain about a single word?


Since you don't know what "swamped" means, substitute the word "overwhelmed."


Or to clarify even further, the warming due to absorption by the glass is orders of magnitude greater than absorption by CO2.


And if you don't understand what I wrote you need to go back to Physics 101.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The funny thing is you think you do. Why is the interior temperature of a car hotter than the outside on a hot summer day? Do you know why? It's the same principle that forms the basis for the higher observed temperature in the dessicator with the CO2 in Bill Nyes experiment. Do you know what the phenomenon is called and why it happens? I'll let you think about it.

---

You have no idea what you're talking about. The funny thing is you think you do. Why is the interior temperature of a car hotter than the outside on a hot summer day? Do you know why? It's the same principle of Bill Nyes experiment. Do you know what the phenomenon is called and why it happens? I'll let you think about it.

 

If you believe that then you are truly clueless.
 If you actually know of a "Physics Forum" you should present our thread of comments about the experiment and see what they think.

 

All of that is a deflection anyway. The quality of the experiment in that video is not the point, that was just a side comment. The point is that Bill Nye falsified the thermometer display in that video. He's Bill Nye the liar guy.


 

Since you don't understand the physics, maybe you'd like to comment on the photoshopping.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

If you believe that then you are truly clueless.
If you actually know of a "Physics Forum" you should present our thread of comments about the experiment and see what they think.

All of that is a deflection anyway. The quality of the experiment in that video is not the point, that was just a side comment. The point is that Bill Nye falsified the thermometer display in that video. He's Bill Nye the liar guy.


Since you don't understand the physics, maybe you'd like to comment on the photoshopping.

The real problem is you think you understand the physics and you don't. You don't even know how the greenhouse effect works. I mean we learn this in elementary and middle school.

---

The real problem is you think you understand the physics and you don't. You don't even know how the greenhouse effect works. I mean we learn this in elementary and middle school.

 

That explains it. You are still living with the middle school simplification of the phenomenon.


 

And once again, the main point: Bill Nye the Liar Guy.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

LOL... talk about "assumptions"

 

The entire premise of man made climate change is built on baseless, false assumptions!

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

That explains it. You are still living with the middle school simplification of the phenomenon.


And once again, the main point: Bill Nye the Liar Guy.

Take a hike bro you don't know what you're talking about. Quit playing yourself. My 8 year old kid has a better understanding of this experiment than you do. But this is what I'm going to do. I'm going to take this thread to either Physics Reddit or Physics.org forum and see what they have to say. You should be embarrassed at your poor understanding of the GH effect.

---

"bro"

 

"quit playing yourself"

 

"I'm taking my toys and running off to reddit"

 

Things professional scientists say.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

"bro"


"quit playing yourself"


"I'm taking my toys and running off to reddit"


Things professional scientists say.

It's a message board. He's not working. Have you heard how Trump talks?

---

LOL... talk about "assumptions"


The entire premise of man made climate change is built on baseless, false assumptions!

Things that people say when they can't contribute a lick to the thread due to having not even a basic fundamental understanding of natural phenomenon.

---