SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Environmentalist Thread
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Maurice Winn who wrote (21856)6/5/2008 10:31:06 AM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) of 36917
 
What mechanism are you confused about? CO2, despite all of Watsons nonsense absorbs LW radiation in bands which H2O does not. In high H2O high pressure environments (like the lower tropical atmosphere) CO2 does not have much effect, because H2O absorption is near saturation, and the absorption lines are broadened, so H2O more nearly covers the CO2 spectrum. In the upper atmosphere and in colder air this is not the case.

As the 6-easy steps pointed out, CO2 in the atmosphere accounts for about 30W/m2 per the best accounting of it. If you or Watson think differently, by all means write a paper on the subject. As I pointed out, I don't know of any credible scientists who doubt this, but both you and Watson seem confused on that point as well.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News