Ah, yes – and now they can use all that power and capacity to forecast the next three days.

Lee, unlike some on this blog, I sympathesize with your complaint about post snipping.

Gunnar, you probably have not been around long enough to know this, but his problem isn’t post snipping. It’s simple incompetence. He apparently, for the past several years, has been subjugated to the most extreme censorship imaginable. More likely, he simply doesn’t understand how to make posts that work. Additionally, he’ll leave for a few months, then come back with post after post of complaint and wonder why Spam Karma clips him… yeah, Spam Karma will register a sudden jump in posts from a specific IP and cut them, a point Lee has NEVER understood.

Mark

The problem with this blog is that it’s about math and not science. It’s really all about auditing the math work of AGWers. The blunt truth is that Steve M is a math guy, and is generally uncomfortable with excessive science discussion. Steve has it in his head that AGW propoganda is “mainstream”, not the known scientific laws of science. Since this discussion is verging on science, it will probably be snipped. Like Lee, there’s a lot of science that I don’t understand, but it’s clear now that this blog is not a great place to learn. Maybe someday, I’ll get my own blog working at http://www.critical-thinker.org/

>> How is that possible? Concentrations of a molecule can affect the wavelength that the molecule can absorb? Beyond this expanding absorption band, is all the IR in the existing CO2 band already absorbed by CO2?

It’s not possible, they just make things up. They also pretend that C02 is a black body that emits significant levels of IR radiation. Think about that for a moment. An object is red, because it completly absorbs other frequencies, for example, blue frequency radiation. Yet, what they are claiming is equivalent to saying that a red object emits blue radiation. C02 absorbs many infrared frequencies. It seems like a stretch to consider a gas molecule as a black body, but what do I know, these AGW guys are mainstream.

And with their radiative balance idea, which is the very foundation of AGW, they also pretend that radiation is conserved. Have you ever heard of that physical law? Mass is conserved, Energy is conserved, Heat is conserved, but radiation? That’s a new one, but discussing that would be “off topic”, since we first have to understand the mainstream papers before we start worrying about known scientific laws. Your question is right on point, since what they are saying violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Steve doesn’t want to discuss this, since there is no statistics that he can audit, so this will be snipped shortly.

I hope this is the right place to post this in – if not, my apologies. But hopefully somebody can help me out.

I started wondering what remaining IR is left over (beyond the absorption caused by pre-industrial CO2 levels) which additional levels of CO2 could absorb, leading to an increase in temperature. I was basically trying to look at the fundamental principles of GW. I did some googling, and came across the real climate site, which explained that the absorption bands for CO2 could actually expand with higher levels of CO2, and that’s where the extra absorption comes from. How is that possible? Concentrations of a molecule can affect the wavelength that the molecule can absorb? Beyond this expanding absorption band, is all the IR in the existing CO2 band already absorbed by CO2?

Any help?