This First-Ever Plant Sucks CO2 out of the Air and Feeds It to Vegetables

[Joe Wooten]

The Global Warming model states that CO2 traps heat and 'forces' it back to the surface. How does a colder body radiate heat to a warmer one? It works the other way around.

If anything CO2 would radiate it in the other direction, to the colder outer space.

No, it does not. CO2 traps heat by reflecting infrared radiation, but only up to a point, and after that everything else radiates out the atmosphere. Venus is a hell planet only because the atmosphere is so much thicker that Earth's, roughly by a factor of 93. There ain't enough CO2 on Earth to re-create that kind of atmosphere as most of it is in carbonate rocks like limestone. Human activities will not force this on us despite whatever the late Carl Sagan says.....

[Free Vulcan]

Heat radiates from the sun to the earth, no way is the earth hotter than the sun. 

Yes, the sun is warming, earth colder, and the sun radiates toward the earth.

[Free Vulcan]

No, it does not. CO2 traps heat by reflecting infrared radiation, but only up to a point, and after that everything else radiates out the atmosphere. Venus is a hell planet only because the atmosphere is so much thicker that Earth's, roughly by a factor of 93. There ain't enough CO2 on Earth to re-create that kind of atmosphere as most of it is in carbonate rocks like limestone. Human activities will not force this on us despite whatever the late Carl Sagan says.....

Does it? That's the old 'glass pane' greenhouse effect theory first postulated in the 1880's. But does our atmosphere actually act like a glass pane greenhouse? Does CO2 act like that? I've read papers from scientists that dispute that.

[rodamala]

There's no global warming because there's no greenhouse effect. It's a manufactured fiction not science They could have avoided wasting their money put it to better use toward something else.

@Free Vulcan

I admit that I haven't read the full article... but I would wager you a cold beer that it was not "their money" being wasted.

[Joe Wooten]

Does it? That's the old 'glass pane' greenhouse effect theory first postulated in the 1880's. But does our atmosphere actually act like a glass pane greenhouse? Does CO2 act like that? I've read papers from scientists that dispute that.

Dr. Roy Spencer, who is not a Warmista, does satellite measurements of IR radiation out into space by the planet and compares that to IR measurements at the surface. There is a significant difference between the two, but as I said before, the amount of heat trapped by greenhouse gasses is small and varies slightly by the total concentration of these gasses (all of them). Analyses  show that after CO2 reaches a certain concentration, it no longer traps more heat, but allows it to pass on through. This little fact is what drives the warmistas nuts about Dr. Spencer, because he proves more CO2 WILL NOT result in more heat staying in the atmosphere.

Also, he has proven the correlation between CO2 concentration and "global average" temperature is very weak, orders of magnitude weaker than assumed by ALL the climate models. So weak in fact as to be statistically insignificant.

[Cripplecreek]

Dr. Roy Spencer, who is not a Warmista, does satellite measurements of IR radiation out into space by the planet and compares that to IR measurements at the surface. There is a significant difference between the two, but as I said before, the amount of heat trapped by greenhouse gasses is small and varies slightly by the total concentration of these gasses (all of them). Analyses  show that after CO2 reaches a certain concentration, it no longer traps more heat, but allows it to pass on through. This little fact is what drives the warmistas nuts about Dr. Spencer, because he proves more CO2 WILL NOT result in more heat staying in the atmosphere.

Also, he has proven the correlation between CO2 concentration and "global average" temperature is very weak, orders of magnitude weaker than assumed by ALL the climate models. So weak in fact as to be statistically insignificant.

I know here in the north I love those cloudy winter nights because they usually aren't the bitter cold like the clear nights. Of course that's water vapor.

[Joe Wooten]

I know here in the north I love those cloudy winter nights because they usually aren't the bitter cold like the clear nights. Of course that's water vapor.

Yep. I live in the frozen steppes of Northern Illinois and can vouch that cloudy nights are much warmer than clear dry ones ones. Water vapor has a VERY strong heat trapping effect, but after a certain point it won't trap any more heat either. There are limits to the greenhouse effect the warmistas refuse to acknowledge.

[Free Vulcan]

Dr. Roy Spencer, who is not a Warmista, does satellite measurements of IR radiation out into space by the planet and compares that to IR measurements at the surface. There is a significant difference between the two, but as I said before, the amount of heat trapped by greenhouse gasses is small and varies slightly by the total concentration of these gasses (all of them). Analyses  show that after CO2 reaches a certain concentration, it no longer traps more heat, but allows it to pass on through. This little fact is what drives the warmistas nuts about Dr. Spencer, because he proves more CO2 WILL NOT result in more heat staying in the atmosphere.

Also, he has proven the correlation between CO2 concentration and "global average" temperature is very weak, orders of magnitude weaker than assumed by ALL the climate models. So weak in fact as to be statistically insignificant.

Thanks for the explanation. That makes much more sense than the 'glass pane' atmosphere they try to push.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Yep. I live in the frozen steppes of Northern Illinois and can vouch that cloudy nights are much warmer than clear dry ones ones. Water vapor has a VERY strong heat trapping effect, but after a certain point it won't trap any more heat either. There are limits to the greenhouse effect the warmistas refuse to acknowledge.

One of the biggest claims with AGW theory is that increasing warmth would put more moisture in the air, and we'd get more storms and insurance claims would increase. This is a claim that can actually be proven false, and was. Warren Buffett himself mentioned this and was hardly given any attention on the subject. Actuaries have run the numbers and have found there are no more claims for storm damage than there were 30-40 years ago.