Please consider three concise points about the analysis of “climate” response to emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and other trace non-condensing IR-active gases.
About models:
Not one of the pre-stabilized, time-step-iterated, parameter-tuned-to-hindcast climate models has ever had any diagnostic or prognostic authority concerning the influence of rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O on trends of any climate variable. This is because the step-wise computation of climate system response to incoming solar energy produces a rapid buildup of uncertainty far greater than the effect being investigated, for any emissions scenario. More here.
About space-based observation:
The high-resolution images from GOES East for Band 16 confirm that two factors dominate the local and overall longwave emission to space: The formation and dissipation of clouds, and the time dependence of skin surface response to the daily pulse of solar heating under clear skies. Attribution of any portion of the reported land or ocean temperature trends to rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O is not justified, considering how the land + ocean + atmosphere system exhibits such strong characteristics of powered operation, self-regulation, and horizontal mass and energy transport. The impressive influence of the water cycle is implied in these images, especially in time-lapse presentation. More here. Stop the video to read the full text description.
About atmospheric dynamics:
The computed incremental IR absorbing power from rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, N2O and other IR-active trace gases in the atmosphere is not capable of exerting a perceptible and physically persistent “warming” influence on the climate system. This is because dynamic energy conversion (in W/m^2) within the general circulation, operating throughout the depth of the troposphere, massively overwhelms the static IR “warming” tendency (also in W/m^2). Therefore an assumption that TOA longwave emission to space is suppressed as a result (i.e. the core concept of GHG “forcing”), cannot be justified based on the spectral IR absorption characteristics of these gases alone, nor by spectral emission profiles observed from space or from the ground. More here, with background, references, plots, and a time-lapse video for visualizing the issue, based on the ERA5 hourly parameter “vertical integral of energy conversion.”
That is all for now. Skeptics of climate alarm NEED NOT, and in my view OUGHT NOT, concede that *some* sensible heat gain down here is to be expected from what emissions of CO2 and the other IR-active non-condensing trace gases do in the atmosphere. No one knows that.
FYI: At the Mauna Loa Obs. in Hawaii, the concentrations of CO2 and CH4 in dry air are currently 432 ppmv an 1.93 ppmv, respectively. One cubic meter of this air has mass of 1,290 g and contains 0.85 g of CO2 and 1.93 mg of CH4. The small amounts of these greenhouse gases in the atmosphere cannot have any effect on air temperature, weather and climate.
The major processes for warming of the air are: heating of the earth’s surfaces by the absorption of sunlight, contact of air with the surfaces and warming of it by conduction, and by convection the warm air rises and heats up the atmosphere.
The main reason for the low concentrations of these gas in air is that they are absorbed by oceans and land surface waters.
Thank you for your reply. There is a variable IR coupling of the skin surface of land and oceans to the lower atmosphere at the interface. This is not to be dismissed as a factor in the net energy transfer to the air.
Hello Harold,
The major processes are described is these paragraphs with numbers
I verified all results with AI
Greenhouse gases do little to hinder the heating of the Earth by sunlight, but they absorb and re-emit IR radiation, making it a little harder for Earth to release IR radiation directly from its surface to space, and requiring slightly higher temperatures to get rid of the energy.
However, below the clouds, the most important greenhouse gas is hugely abundant water vapor, H₂O, not CO2, a trace gas at 0.043%. When combining the radiative effects of water vapor, liquid water droplets, and ice in clouds, H2O has a massive influence on the transfer and absorption of IR radiation; worldwide, at least a 10-15 times greater than CO₂.
The Tropics: The area between the Tropic of Cancer, 23.5 degree N, and the Tropic of Capricorn, 23.5 degree S, is about 40% of the earth surface. The Tropics area is about 78% ocean and 22% land. The tropics area generates 300 to 400 billion metric ton of water vapor each day. The rest of the world area, about 60%, 100 to 150 billion metric ton; thus, a 50% greater area generates water vapor only about 1/3 of the tropics!
The Ocean Surface in the Tropics: The IR photon emission from an ocean surface at 26 C is about 438 W/m^2, the upward radiant energy flux. Near the ocean surface, because the water vapor ppm is about 26,000, much larger than the CO2 ppm at 425, the influence of water vapor on the transfer and absorption of IR radiation of surface photons is about 20 – 25% (109.5 W/m^2), whereas CO2 is about 1% (4.4 W/m^2); this shows CO2 minimally adds to the world’s “baseline” temperature.
The remaining upward radiant energy flux, about 75%, is quickly transferred 5 – 10% by collisions that warm air molecules (mainly N2 and O2), 65 – 70% by evaporating huge quantities of ocean water.
NOTE: As ocean temperatures drop from 26 C to 5 C, the H2O ppm drops from 26,000 ppm to 6,746 ppm. H2O transfer and absorption drops from 109.5 W/m^2 to 23.5 W/m^2 (a big drop). CO2 transfer and absorption drops from 4.4 W/m^2 to 3.3 W/m^2 (a small drop); even at these cold ocean temperatures, the H2O effect is at least 7 times the CO2 effect.
In the lower atmosphere up to the bottom of clouds, as water vapor partially condenses, it releases latent heat, which converts into sensible heat, which by collisions, warms the surrounding air (mainly N2 and O2), causing air to rise. This is a second warming source subsequent to the above upward surface radiant energy flux.
Above the clouds and Atmospheric Window: At higher elevations, H2O ppm is much less, whereas CO2 ppm is only slightly less, and temperatures and densities of air are much less. About 70% of photons transfer their energy by collisions with N2 and O2 in the lower atmosphere, the rest radiatively interact with GHGs.
Neither CO2 nor H20 efficiently absorb 8 to 12 um surface photons, which, if evading collision in the lower atmosphere, will, in the higher atmosphere, experience minimal collisions and freely travel to space. An excited CO2 molecule is much more likely to release its energy by emitting a photon in a random direction, including space, instead of a colliding with another molecule.
At the colder temperatures, the atmosphere shifts entirely to longer wavelengths (greater than 15 um), due to the quantum mechanical structure of the CO2 molecule. CO2 has very small absorption windows at these longer wavelengths, any photons mostly go to space unimpeded. Radiative transfer is only part of what controls Earth’s climate; one pathway.
Another pathway is the huge quantities of water vapor and warm air transported by air and ocean currents from the tropics, where maximum sunlight is absorbed, to polar regions, where much more IR radiation is released to space than is absorbed from the Sun. CO2, a trace gas at 0.0425%, has a very minor influence.
The Tropics are Hugely Important for the World’s Weather: Globally, about 2.5 to 3.0 trillion metric tons of water evaporate each day; the tropics account for about 2.0 to 2.5 trillion metric tons each day.
Because of the high heat of evaporation of ocean water (2,260,000 J/kg) an enormous quantity of energy is added. The water vapor, along with air warmed by colliding with the water vapor and water surface, is lifted up to about 10,000 – 20,000 ft, where the water vapor condenses to clouds, then all of it is transported by prevailing winds to northern latitudes. The air and water vapor is being replenished by prevailing trade winds and sea currents. In addition, sea currents, such as the Gulf Stream, carry warm water from the Gulf of Mexico to West Europe.
NOTE: Evaporating one metric ton of water requires about 2,442,000 kJ of solar energy; for comparison, 1 metric ton of crude oil is about 41,868,000 kJ. World crude oil consumption is about 14.0 million metric ton per day
In fact, the climate of the Earth has no single control knob, and all theoretical and empirical evidence points to CO₂ being a relativelyunimportant factor.
That means relative to dynamic energy conversion within the general circulation, the IR absorbing power related to annual additions of CO2 ppm is negligible – vanishingly weak – inconsequential
Wil, as I point out in https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/12/why-albedo-is-the-wrong-measure-of-reflectivity-for-modeling-climate/ , Fresnel’s equation demonstrates that the reflectivity of liquid water varies in a very non-linear fashion with the angle of incidence. What I didn’t dwell on in the article is that the light that penetrates the water, and is capable of warming it, is (1-reflectivity). Also, the spectral distribution of the EM radiation that is reflected approaches that of the source and the amount penetrating (crossing the air/water boundary) approaches zero as the reflected light approaches the limit of 100%. To deal with the processes accurately, requires the integration of the Fresnel function over the surface of water over time. As with Grey Body thermal emissions, an average value is not going to be close to the correct value because of the non-linear nature of the functions.
“In the lower atmosphere up to the bottom of clouds, as water vapor partially condenses, it releases latent heat, which converts into sensible heat, which by collisions, warms the surrounding air (mainly N2 and O2), causing air to rise. This is a second warming source subsequent to the above upward surface radiant energy flux.”
Much too simple a description of the energy conversions occurring in a a rising column of humid air! Always keep in mind that condensation is an isothermal process, which means that saying that “latent heat,,, converts into sensible heat” is very misleading. First, we know that the amount of latent energy released by condensation depends on temperature (directly) and pressure (inversely), and that both P and T reduce, generally, with altitude. We observe that the P/T conditions which can support condensation occur everywhere from sea level (fog) to several kilometers up (ice). We also know that, while surface pressure is relatively constant, surface temperature varies widely from the tropics to the poles, therefore the P/T profile with altitude varies accordingly. Next, we know that rising humid air can contain energy in many forms: latent, of course, but also pressure, internal (heat), potential (gravity), kinetic (velocity), chemical (action with nucleating elements), and electric (lightning). Any or all of these forms of energy may be involved in direct or indirect conversions as a kilogram of rising water vapor approaches the conditions that will support isothermal condensation. For example, if the changing P/T ratio results in excess latent energy, this may be absorbed in increasing potential or kinetic energy, or in maintaining a temperature against a falling pressure without condensation.
Yes, I agree, the transfer and transportation of energy within the atmosphere is endlessly complicated.
I do mention, at the ocean surface, the reduction in prominence of H2O vapor from 26 C to 4 C. But even at 4 C, H2O vapor is 7 times more prominent than CO2.
The Fresnel issue, brought up by Clyde, is an additional factor that needs to be quantified from tropics to poles.
Good points. A similar analogy might be that if you consider the erosion of the rock cliffs of Niagara Falls, the erosion might eventually work it’s way all across Lake Erie to Toledo Ohio. It’s like forecasting that flushing the toilets in the Niagara Falls visitors center is destroying Toledo and therefore requiring that all visitors to the falls must wear diapers instead of using the toilets.
Thank you for your reply. I have family on Grand Island just upstream of Niagara Falls. Maybe I should tell them to moderate their water usage to “save Toledo.” 🙂
It is hard to tell if the social media posts from certain groups that are still pushing the CO2 / (CH4 is 1234.567 times stronger than CO2) narrative is driven by legitimate research anymore. But with the considerable reductions in SO2 emissions over the last two decades, and the indisputable physics behind Anthropogenic SO2 emission perturbing incoming sunlight, there is no research being done to compute how hot will this planet if all SO2 emissions are removed. The research that is out there explains the effects by statements such as “SO2 make clowd top shinny. at id wefwects sunlii”. Instead of the decades long emission of shipping fuels that were 3.5% Sulfur content were carried into the upper troposphere by convection, combined with water vapor and UV radiation to form Sulfuric Acid aerosols which are highly reflective. A 1% change of incoming across the Pacific Ocean dwarfs just about any forcing one could conjure up.
Thank you for your reply. I agree that the effects of SO2 emissions should not be ignored. I note that another significant change was the switch to ULSD (ultra low sulfur diesel fuel) beginning in 2006 and fully implemented by the early 2010’s in the U.S. This meant that all #2 fuel oil for heating was also supplied at the low sulfur limits. This is a case where “more research” is justified.
The emissivity of CO2 at atmospheric pressure and temperature is near zero.
Here is Grok’s answer to my question.
”Emissivity for CO2 at <30°C and <1 atm: Given these conditions, the emissivity would likely be:
– Very close to zero for practical purposes. Let’s say, for an extremely rough estimate, somewhere around 0.001 or even less, depending on the exact conditions. This is because at such low temperatures and pressures, CO2’s interaction with thermal radiation is minimal.”
Mkelly….do an image search on Hottel charts….look closely…those lines are bar-cm…meant for furnace combustion chambers and were developed in the 1950’s for very wide band emissions….so yeah…in that combustion chamber size range, the effective emissivity in a combustion chamber of the CO2 is pretty low per cm of beam length…..now multiply by the number of cm thick that the atmosphere is….to see what the effective emissivity of CO2 is…as far as a satellite sensor looking at the ground. Hmmm, much bigger…hmmm can easily be over 1.0….hmmm maybe shouldn’t use for atmospheric CO2…especially with low temps off the chart to the left where they steeply climb….
And Hottel would have been ecstatic with Hitran…
Irrespective of the many things you and I agree on, this one is simply not right, or maybe is not explained well.
This is because dynamic energy conversion (in W/m^2) within the general circulation, operating throughout the depth of the troposphere, massively overwhelms the static IR “warming” tendency (also in W/m^2).
I feel like being a difficult person today, so I’m going to explain why I disagree with you. Some days ago I tried to illustrate using some satellite images that the radiational behavior of CO2 is independent of the dynamics of bulk heat transfer — near IR, thermal IR, it doesn’t matter. This is the reason, which I tried to explain to N. Shroeder not long ago, why one can use a thermal IR “thermometer” to measure skin temperature on a human being despite the fact that half the heat loss of the human body is the result of convection. One does not need an understanding of the dynamics of heat being carried away from skin by air currents and water vapor to measure skin temperature — just IR emitted power with a clear view of skin surface.
Radiation as a means of heat transport works in parallel independently of bulk mechanisms in many instances, which is what I think you mean by “dynamics”. Now clouds complicate the picture quite a bit, but above some level, say a few kilometers above the surface, radiation becomes the dominant heat transfer mechanism, and CO2 contributes a not negligible effort to it.
The convection you mention is a factor in cooling of the surface. It determines the rate of cooling. Radiation only measures the exact temperature at a point in time. If one were to measure the temperature on a continuous basis, one would find out that the rate of cooling would not be explained entirely by radiation change alone.
one would find out that the rate of cooling would not be explained entirely by radiation change alone.
Of course, Jim, that why I say it is a parallel mechanism. Eventually at altitude, you must know, it is the only mechanism available. However, to say that radiation only measures temperature and has no impact on the temperature itself is going to get you in trouble with the First Law of Thermodynamics.
“Radiation as a means of heat transport works in parallel independently of bulk mechanisms in many instances, which is what I think you mean by “dynamics”.”
Longwave radiation emitted from a unit mass of air at any instant is at the expense of internal energy (as defined within the meteorological discipline.) Longwave radiation absorbed into a unit mass of air at any instant increases internal energy.
But at any instant, at any altitude, the internal energy state of a unit mass of air is not constrained by absorbed or emitted longwave radiation. If a unit mass of air at, say, high altitude is experiencing compression heating associated with downward vertical velocity and positive energy conversion [kinetic energy] -> [internal energy + potential energy] then its internal energy increases and its longwave emission will increase. If it is experiencing expansion cooling associated with upward vertical velocity and negative energy conversion [internal energy + potential energy] -> [kinetic energy] then its internal energy decreases and longwave emission will decrease. These dynamic processes are many orders of magnitude stronger, in determining the internal energy state of a unit mass of air at any instant, than the absorption of longwave radiation from any direction, or the emission of longwave radiation in any direction.
The internal energy state and the longwave radiation are not separate channels acting independently.
“…but above some level, say a few kilometers above the surface, radiation becomes the dominant heat transfer mechanism, and CO2 contributes a not negligible effort to it.”
OK, but on this point, please consider spending a bit more time with this post from March and its supporting plots of vertical velocity and the scatter plots of vertical velocity vs vertical integral of energy conversion. Pressure levels of 300 hPa, 500 hPa, and 700 hPa are analyzed. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/03/15/open-thread-181/#comment-4174555
Whenever Dibbell or Kilty writes a comment here at WUWT….I find it worth my morning coffee to read in detail and appreciate where they are coming from.
I make no claim, and it would not be correct, that dynamic energy conversion should be expected to obscure the narrow spectral signatures of absorption of near IR or thermal IR for CO2.
There is no contradiction with my more general conclusion as I have stated and you have quoted, “This is because dynamic energy conversion (in W/m^2) within the general circulation, operating throughout the depth of the troposphere, massively overwhelms the static IR “warming” tendency (also in W/m^2).” By “”warming” tendency” I am referring to the magnitude of the assumed climate “forcing” for 2XCO2, not the particulars within the spectrum. Sure, you can still “see” the IR signatures for CO2 due to absorption within those bands, as total-column values in clear conditions. But those properties do not constrain the overall full-spectrum emission to space.
This is because the step-wise computation of climate system response to incoming solar energy produces a rapid buildup of uncertainty far greater than the effect being investigated, for any emissions scenario. More here.
Warmists really have no idea about uncertainty other than as you increase data points in an average, the uncertainty decreases. This just isn’t the case, but convincing them will take work.
The formation and dissipation of clouds, and the time dependence of skin surface response to the daily pulse of solar heating under clear skies.
The warmists insist that an average insolation determined by spreading the “pulse” over 24 hours will allow correct calculations is a joke. They ignore the 3D geometry, trigonometry, and necessity of integrating over time. Not scientific at all.
strativarius
July 5, 2026 2:33 am
The Stern gang – The gaslighting goes on. Nicholas Stern believes he is the expert’s expert nowadays…
Make Ed Miliband chancellor, ex-chief Treasury adviser tells Andy Burnham
Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy
Burnham makes me uneasy, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt to see if he can actually get a grip on Whitehall.
But Ed Milliband scares me and must come nowhere near the country’s purse strings ……or the new Cabinet. One can only hope at this point.
And there we part company. He has failed on two attempts at the Labour leadership. Against mad Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn. His supposed triumphs in Manchester are in reality the product of his predecessors policies.
His first big idea – given the state of the nation, defence and the economy etc – is to duplicate No 10 (expenses, staff etc) in the North (Manchester). Then it’s on to increasing taxation from the dead to creating a real North South divide.
Burnham has declared war on the South. Your homes and savings are no longer safe London and the South East already vastly subsidise the rest of the country. The answer is to liberate the North, not seize southern wealth – Telegraph
I wrote him off a long time ago. And he is, apparently, better than the entire 400 plus Labour MPs who are already in the House. That certainly beats the Tories.
And don’t forget our Andy rang around 26 constituencies trying to persuade the sitting MP to stand down. He got lucky on no 27 in Makerfield.
Burnham is intending to create his own fiefdom in the North where we will all be subservient to our masters. He’s as ideologically as far left as they come.
Their sister council in West Berkshire is giving newbuild properties to Afghans and Ukrainians who leapfrog over the thousands who have been on the waiting list for social housing for years. We have military veterans sleeping on the streets. They never get a thought.
From what I have read, a great schism has developed in the UK, and both sides detest the current government.
At the same time, their electric grid is very fragile, and they depend on just-in-time deliveries of LNG, a result of being able to store only a couple of days of reserve. One cold snap this year will either send prices soaring, a result of buying lng on the open market, or a widespread outage. Or both events could happen, soaring costs followed by a blackout.
One can’t help but speculate that such an event could be the final straw to break the camel’s back. We could see a mass uprising of two factions, each trying to overthrow the government and take power. Are we going to see the collapse of an industrialized country?
“Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy”
This has to be one of the greatest lying-by-omission quotes I’ve ever seen. Nurtured by decades of BBC- and Guardian-thinking at the Satanic level, to which only the London elites can aspire. If our football team was at this level, we’d be hammering Mexico 10-0 tonight in Mexico City.
So what is the full no-omissions, reality quote, one might ask ?
“Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy, which is how he knows exactly how to continue to destroy the UK economy”.
Stern just demonstrated his own lack of vision. Thinking Miliband has vision is about as divorced from reality as one can get.
The UK is in Big Trouble. It is being led by Leftwing fools and imbeciles, who think they have it all figured out. They don’t, they just think they do.
Germany, France Italy and Spain are in big trouble as well.
NATO just voted to “loan”, interest free, $70 billion for 2027 to Ukraine for 1) conducting war, 2) run the rest of the country.
However, the significance of the liberation of Konstantinowka cannot be overestimated.
Politically speaking, this means the exposure of the entire media campaign, which claimed that the balance of power had shifted and that the Ukrainian armed forces were on the advance (something Zelenskyy forcefully drilled into the West and the media).
In societal terms, this means the end of the illusion that Zelenskyy had implanted in Ukrainians, namely that the Ukrainian armed forces could hold their ground in the Donetsk region. But the road to Slavyansk and Kramatorsk is now open. All Ukrainians know that these cities cannot be held.
From a military perspective, the collapse of the Ukrainian defense has occurred in Konstantinowka. The defensive structures and fortifications, built up over 12 years, since 2014, have crumbled. And this at the end—within just a few days.
The entire war machine of Ukraine—tens of thousands of drones and soldiers, elite units, and the most valuable resources deployed to defend Konstantinowka—proved insufficient. The city was taken by small assault troops of the Russian armed forces. And here, neither missiles nor F-16 fighter jets nor attacks on the oil refinery in Tatarstan could do anything.
And this is no stroke of luck. A week ago, the Ukrainian armed forces’ Defense Minister A. R. Belousov reported to us military correspondents not only about the advance of our soldiers through the streets, but literally from building to building.
The complexity of the work accomplished is almost indescribable. The organization of a THOUSAND ATTACKS DAILY—by air force, missiles, artillery, as well as air and ground drones.
The detection and neutralization of every firing position in every window and every corner before our assault troops arrive there.
The supply and control of thousands of small groups in real time. The work done by the Ministry of Defense is simply colossal.
And what do the Ukrainian and Western generals see? If the Russians managed to do this in Konstantinowka, they will also succeed eight kilometers further on—in Slavyansk.
This is a major defeat, one more, for the NATO trained/supplied/financed-Ukrainian army. Only two fortress cities remain to be taken: Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. After that, the road will be wide open to Kyiv and Odesa for the Russian army.
I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I don’t know what to believe when I hear contradictory claims. However, for whoever provided the down-vote, If you disagree with what wilpost said, I think you should provide counter evidence, or at least reasons for a different interpretation, rather than just down-voting.
Those folks have contrary opinions based of what they are fed by the Western Mass Media, which is dutifully hyping “successes” of Ukraine, and that Russia will soon collapse.
It would be embarrassing for NATO and the EU not to have these “successes”, after all the money and effort that has and is being spent.
Those folks do not look at a range of sources on their own to get more balanced info.
Often, they are dismal products of mind-numbing, E-12 state education and state liberal arts college education systems.
The left always has a “vision” to perfect society and mankind. And it always involves complete control of the masses by the elite and government.
Of course those on the left are also convinced that they are the elite and the only ones smart enough to be allowed to make decisions.
To the above 3 or 4 responses to me, yes Miliband has the vision of a sixth form schoolboy whose political development stopped there. Stern, however, has a vision that has always appeared more sinister. It could be just the regular garden variety greed though, who knows?
Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy
Yeah, tunnel vision
Scissor
July 5, 2026 5:00 am
Paul Pelosi is doing his part to get vehicles off the road. It seems he mounted a hit and run on a parked Tesla in Yountville making it inoperable and then he drove off before his own car conked out.
His Karma met its Dharma … tragically —
— ’twas another Story-in-5-Words.
In the sequel, implicate his Mater-Ma.
(Why do all these bad things keep happening to Queen Nancy-P.?]
In the prequel, his head met a hammer.
Yes, and the guy who mysteriously got into his house with the hammer is now doing 30 years without parole in a maximum security prison. When he gets Epsteined, you can say you read it here first.
A law should not be upheld if it is patently unconstitutional. Also, both police and district attorneys frequently decide not to prosecute in the cases of insufficient evidence, case loads that strain the resources of the department and priority has to be given to the most serious ‘crimes.’ ‘Discretion’ is often used, particularly by police officers, when there are extenuating circumstances.
If the framers of the Constitution agreed with you, they wouldn’t have given the President the power to grant pardons and amnesties. The system is working as designed. You may disagree with with the decisions made by the president, but you aren’t the president so what you think doesn’t matter. He is operating within the guidelines of the law.
Did Trump release the Jan 6 rioters? Answer Yes
Did these rioters assault police officers and vandalise property? Answer Yes
Did Trump say he wanted to give these criminals money? Answer Yes
No lies there Mark.
Here you go Tom. Took 20 seconds…
On his first day in office, Donald Trump issued sweeping Proclamation 10887 granting full pardons and clemency to virtually all of the nearly 1,600 people charged or convicted for their roles in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. [1, 2]
This mass pardon included hundreds of individuals who were convicted of violently assaulting law enforcement officers and obstructing police using deadly weapons like flag poles, chemical irritants, batons, and stun guns. [1, 2, 3] Key Facts & Actions:
Violent Offenders Included: Among the blanket clemency recipients were individuals specifically convicted of felony assaults on police, such as Robert Palmer (who attacked officers with a fire extinguisher and a wooden plank) and DJ Rodriguez (who stunned a D.C. police officer with a taser). [1, 2, 3]
Extremist Groups: He also commuted the sentences of 14 convicted seditious conspirators from the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers. [1, 2]
Trump’s Defense: Trump publicly defended his decision to issue pardons to those who attacked police, dismissing their actions as “very minor incidents”. [1, 2]
Judicial Limits: While sweeping in scope, federal judges have ruled that this mass clemency applies only to events on Jan. 6 itself and does not cover unrelated, prior crimes like planting pipe bombs near the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee headquarters on January 5
Did Trump repeatedly ask Nancy Pelosi to accept the reading and waiting 10,000 National Guard troops, but she refused, as stated by her own daughter, and testimony by Capitol Police, who were desperately unable to cope.
Did the FBI infiltrate the rioters to goad them on?
“Did Trump repeatedly ask Nancy Pelosi to accept the reading and waiting 10,000 National Guard troops, but she refused, as stated by her own daughter, and testimony by Capitol Police, who were desperately unable to cope.”
Nope that is a Trump lie and a poor one at that. So easy to check so why didn’t you?
“Did the FBI infiltrate the rioters to goad them on?”
Nope another BS lie. Also easy to check. This was investigated and found to a ridiculous fabricated story.
Trump is credible to the gullible. Your two silly stories a fine example.
And now your “corrupter in chief” is interfering in the football world cup by getting a red card annulled. Outrageous!!!! If the US win this game against Belgium it will be a disgrace…..
Everything Trump touches turns to shite. Another step lower he goes…..
Belgium should decide the game on the field and stop whining about who they have to play.
FIFA gave Belgium an appeal of the decision so maybe Belgium can still manage not to play against the best U.S. player.
Our foreign guests have fallen in love with the United States. They say their media paints a false picture of life in America. They say everyone they meet in America is friendly to them.
This is that “Dark Place” that the new leader of the UK uses to describe Trump’s America.
The people did not find a dark place here.
Here’s a hint: You can’t believe a damn thing the Leftwing Media tells you.
Everything you have written here Tom has nothing to do with the fact Trump has put his corrupt fingers on the scales again to gain an unfair advantage for his team. There are rules in sport for a reason…. to keep things fair. And this rule says, if you get a red card then you don’t play in the next game.
Every other team plays by them except it seems Trumps team…. again.
FIFA declined to confirm any specific discussions but reiterated to POLITICO that the decision to suspend the one-match ban was made by an independent disciplinary committee.
and
FIFA insists that the decision was an independent one made by its 18-person disciplinary committee
Nope. I’m choosing to believe FIFA is lying because Infantino is a corrupt piece of garbage who has made it obvious he wants to have a piece of the pie Trump is offering him, in exchange for …”favours.”
We will never know but I suspect the interference by Trump was part of the reason the USA got thrashed today. I think all the bad press and (justified) attention would have unsettled them. It was the worst I had seen them play. Up till now, they were great.
“Belgium should decide the game on the field and stop whining about who they have to play.”
they didn’t decide to play they were made to. And they whipped the US team resoundingly. But that is an aside to the corruption between Infantino and Trump.
“FIFA gave Belgium an appeal of the decision so maybe Belgium can still manage not to play against the best U.S. player.”
It is totally irrelevant whether the res carded player is the best the US has. In a just world if you do the crime you do the time.
“Our foreign guests have fallen in love with the United States. They say their media paints a false picture of life in America. They say everyone they meet in America is friendly to them.” I‘m sure some of this is true, but I don’t see what it has to do with Trump abusing his power to cheat.
“This is that “Dark Place” that the new leader of the UK uses to describe Trump’s America. The people did not find a dark place here.”
That’s good to hear. The World Cup is the biggest sporting event on the planet. Great to hear the supporters have loved it. I must say I certainly have.
“Here’s a hint: You can’t believe a damn thing the Leftwing Media tells you.”
Can I finish this by turning it around. Imagine if this event was being held in Russia and Putin did what Trump has just done. There would be justifiable outrage, and yet here we have those on the right trying to support Trump in his cheating. I just don’t get it. Is MAGA really that powerful? If so, that is frightening.
Socialists believe they are entitled to their on beliefs, no matter, after implementing with op money, they turn out to be disastrous, which is denied, and more op money is thrown at them until it all blows up, like in the UK, the poster child of a failed state, soon to be Third World.
I just cannot believe an idiot like Miliband is still in his position, instead of in jail.
She was part of a group attacking the capital and was climbing through a window she should not have been. She must have known there would be armed officers there. I am not saying she should have been shot, but it was an extremely risky thing to do. Some would say stupid.
You don’t know what Ashley Babbitt was doing when she was shot and killed. She was on the other side of a locked door and the cop shot her through the window of the door.
How much danger was the cop in when he is behind a door armed and is facing unarmed people?
I think Trump should investigate this killing.
Biden let the perp off, and threw the book at hundreds of innocent people. The people Trump later pardoned and who deserve compensation for the way they were treated.
You are rewriting history Tom. I know exactly what she was doing. I can read.
What happened? “Ashli Babbitt was a 35-year-old U.S. Air Force veteran and staunch supporter of Donald Trump who was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer while attempting to climb through a broken window of a barricaded door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby during the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.”
The Incident: Babbitt was part of a mob seeking to overturn the 2020 election results and gain access to the House chamber. She was shot in the shoulder by Lt. Michael Byrd, who fired a single shot as she attempted to breach the barricaded doorway. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The Investigations: Multiple internal and federal investigations—including by the U.S. Capitol Police and the Department of Justice—cleared Officer Byrd of any wrongdoing, concluding that he reasonably fired in self-defense and to protect members of Congress.
“How much danger was the cop in when he is behind a door armed and is facing unarmed people?”
He would know he was facing a large number of people screaming and yelling trying to breach an area he was there to guard. I think it is utterly unbelievable that you think this cop should ignore an angry mob storming the building. He is paid to defend the elected politicians inside that building. It is why he is armed. If this was reversed and it was a bunch of democrat hooligans trying to get in, I feel comfortable saying you would not be writing what you did.
Excessive force, even by a LEO, is against the law. Therefore, the officer was breaking the law that you respect so much. In the USA, the death penalty is not authorized for stupidity.
Well given there were “multiple” federal and internal investigations that found the officer to have acted properly….. I’m fine to let it go. Now let’s see how the investigations into the murders of the two by the ICE agents go?
One was attempting to drive away…. the other was storming the capital building with a raging mob trying to subvert the democratic process. Yep I can see a difference. See if you can?
Attempting to drive away INTO an officer. The officer in front of the car was under an immediate and specific threat. The other one was firing blindly into a crowd. You are choosing to see only what you want to see.
But what’s the point of trying to explain this to you? You’ll never understand, because you don’t want to. You have made that clear.
I understand you wear a Maga hat that blinds you. Take it off and have a look at the footage. She was shot through the side window, her steering wheel turned to drive away. But let’s wait till the inquiry… oh that’s right her inquiry has stalled because of white house intervention. More corruption from Trump. Still you will love that. Your messiah can do no wrong.
Three shots, Simon, one through the front. A person trained to shoot doing what they’re trained to do, during a tense situation in which he was actually struck by the vehicle. (yes, I’ve seen the footage, and not just what CNN aired)
You believe a general with a grudge who reports something about Trump you like, despite no corroborating evidence. You dismiss a statement by an international organization that is favorable to Trump, despite evidence to the contrary.
You find a cop shooting blindly into a crowd and killing a Trump supporter to be acceptable, and point to the investigation by a Democrat administration as exoneration. You call a cop shooting in self-defense at the driver of a car heading toward him murder, despite the lack of any such conviction or even charge, and call the Republican administration that decided it was a good shoot corrupt.
You apply rules differently depending on the team. Your hypocrisy is blindingly clear to anyone looking at this objectively.
But what is also clear is that there is nothing further to be gained in this discussion, so I’m out.
“You apply rules differently depending on the team. Your hypocrisy is blindingly clear to anyone looking at this objectively.”
Nope I’m consistent. I say wait for the investigation with Good. I have an opinion but happy to wait as I did with the cop who shot the intruder on Capital Hill.
Been pretty well documented that Fifa has issues with corruption. The last guy (Sepp Blatter) left because he was bent as hell. Infantino’s BS Fifa peace prize to Trump told us all we need to know about their relationship.
And just to prove my consistency, I’m more than happy to see Graham Platner go. Politics is no place for a sex criminal, which is why it is so puzzling you guys support the convicted sex criminal Trump. So let’s see how consistent you are. You think someone who is a convicted sex crim should be president?
Nancy just provided the insider tips to her husband, who regularly beat all investment pros by a large margin. It is called insider trading, which is illegal,
All Congress members do the same.
Pocahontas, 1/1024 real Native American, did the same and amassed over $100 million
I see where the Kurds of western Iran are starting to clash with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
I think Trump should provide air cover for the Kurds in any battles they have with the IRGC. This will guarantee the Kurds will win the fight, and this is just the kind of situation you want in order to attack the IRGC.
Let’s get this revolution started with the Kurds fighting back, and as they succeed, the other Iranians who hate the Mullahs will join in the fight. It’s time to oust the religious fanatics from power.
The IRGC cannot win a battle if U.S. forces get involved. If the IRGC forms up in large attack formations, they will be “sitting ducks” for American air power. So the objective of those who want to overthrow the Mullahs should be to get the IRGC to react on a large scale. American air power would wipe them off the battlefield in very short order.
A couple of big military defeats for the IRGC on the ground and it will be all over for the Mullahs.
Let’s get this new revolution going using Kurds and others as our infantry, and U.S. air power will take care of the rest. Our Kurdish/Iranian infantry won’t have to do much serious fighting as U.S. air power will take care of that for them. All they have to do is pose a threat to the IRGC, enough to get them moving. Then: BOOM! No more IRGC!
Trying to deal with religious fanatics is a losing proposition. Once Trump comes to this conclusion, the above scenario should be implemented.
As a disabled combat veteran of the VietNam war, I have first hand experience with our needless interventions and BS wars, and the lasting effects on the men who fight them.
Being a disabled combat veteran does not make you an expert on foreign affairs.
I also served in Vietnam. I volunteered for the army and I volunteered for Vietnam because I supported stopping communism over there rather than having to do it later in the United States.
What I find egregious is the MSM is not reminding the reading public about the documented dangers of nuclear weapons fallout, which led to bans on even above-ground testing. Even though the USA and the rest of the world will probably be immune to the blast effects of a short-lived war initiated by Iran, the rest of the world can expect to see an increase in the radiation-induced cancers, especially among our children and grand-children. I find it interesting that liberals were typically the most out-spoken opponents of war and particularly nuclear weapons, yet they have been as quiet as the proverbial church mice with respect to the consequences of radioactive fallout. It seems that their irrational hatred of Trump is their guidance for their definition of morality. They take every opportunity to whine about Trump, and never give him credit for the things he does even when it is obvious that preventing nuclear proliferation is desirable.
Ah, yas! Back by popular demand the case of the missing 63 or how 63 + 63 became 63.
I first spotted this anomaly while studying AR-5 back in 2014. Was in Overland Park on a contract with a major EPC w time on my hands. Spent a couple of frustrating weeks trying to make these numbers work and I finally had to admit there were two 63s but only one shown on the graphic. The summer interns who made it did not understand the numbers, just arranged them as directed.
Now for our discussing pleasure:
GOZINTAZ positive, GOZOUTAZ negative.
TFK_bams09
160 arrives, per LoT 1 160 is all that can leave.
+160 surface – 80 latent – 17 sensible – 1st 63 but AWOL – 396 BB + 333 back – 2nd 63 LWIR = – 63 AWOL
Solar 63 goes missing
Does not balance.
Both 63s reach OLR
+160 surface – 80 latent – 17 sensible – 1st 63 LWIR – 396 BB + 333 back – 2nd 63 LWIR = – 126
Does not balance.
Schroder, you are so lacking in heat transfer skill….at ground level….your red arrows…398-342=56 is Net heat radiated from the ground to the sky. Then absorbed solar is 161…and 56 radiant+84 latent+20 thermals equals the absorbed sunlight of 161. It BALANCES.
Followed by your claims of a mysterious second 63 (I think you mean 56 on this cartoon, but I digress)…this is called “conservation of energy” on the next layer up.
You don’t seem to understand that, say, your face radiates say 480 W/m^2 to its surroundings…but if the surrounds are 30 C there is no Net radiation to your face. Your face is receiving back from the surroundings the same amount of electromagnetic radiation as it is emitting. Your metabolism does not need to produce 480 w/m^2 of energy…but it will start sweating to get rid of say half of its usual total 100 watts or so of exces heat….by sweating…
And I will add… EMR only becomes HEAT if it is absorbed by something. Technically the 398 needs to be absorbed by a something at absolute zero, like outer space, before it will all be all converted to HEAT. When radiating to something around freezing temp like cloud bottoms, there will be the 342 EMR coming back from surroundings…so the HEAT leaving the surface is only 56. You should have learned this in engineering school in the 70’s….
“When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science.”
Lord Kelvin
Numbers.
Solar luminosity 3.828E+26 W
Solar diameter 1.39E+09 m
Solar spherical area 6.09E+18 m^2
Solar power flux 6.28E+07 W/m^2
S-B BB temperature 5,769.40 K (Yes, 6! Significant figures!!)
Earth average orbital radius 1.496E+11 m
Earth orbital spherical area 2.812E+23 m^2
Solar discular power flux 1,361.13 W/m^2 (+/- 45)
S-B BB temperature 393.62 K
Discular to spherical / 4 340.28 W/m^2
Net 30% albedo 238.20 W/m^2 (+/- 11)
Net atmos absorb 79 159.20 W/m^2
Net/net arriving at surface 159.20 W/m^2
Leaving per LoT 1 159.20 W/m^2
Kinetic sensible 17.00 W/m^2
Kinetic latent 80.00 W/m^2
LWIR by remainder 62.20 W/m^2
Balanced 0.0
All the energy musical chairs are filled.
Imaginary. upwelling/back/duplicate.
Imaginary. S-B calc for 1.5 m surface at 16 C 396 W/m^2
Imaginary. Emissivity. 63/396=0.16
Imaginary. “Back” 333 W/m^2
Imaginary, “extra”, duplicate. 63 W/m^2
396 BB/333 “back”/63 duplicate implode to a big fat ZERO!
Hmmm, seems I need to spend my half cup of morning coffee on Shroeder nonsense again. Let’s see…
Solar luminosity…yes you have the numbers reasonably correct.
Next para…oops the 79159.20 number is wrong….the 159.20 is the number entering the soil/water….not net arriving…
Next para….wow…entirely correct…Balanced…musical chairs filled…I’m proud of your work on this para Nick.
Now the last para…assume 1.5 is a typo for 1.0…16C=396 watts…OK…but this is EMR and isn’t HEAT unless absorbed by a surface at -273 C…and since the mosaic of cloud bottoms, outer space, water vapor and CO2 is emitting 333 of EMR as a result of it’s own temperature (around freezing)….the net radiation heat leaving the surface is 396-333=63 …definitely NOT imaginary…proven by thousands of measurements from Maxwell, Planck, and even your IR thermometer….So the big fat zero you mention is the mark on your heat transfer exam…
Beta Blocker
July 5, 2026 7:51 am
Labour will be in control of the UK at least until August of 2029. Their plan for the next three years is to accelerate the pace of the UK’s transition to a Net Zero marxist-style economy so that by the summer of 2029, it will be near impossible for the UK to recover from their forced economic and energy transformation.
Here is an immigration policy question for Americans.
After 2030, should we be open to allowing a mass migration into the United States of UK citizens who are claiming persecution from their government, with a fast track to US citizenship for those who decide to abandon their lives in the UK for a better life in the former American colonies?
Dear B-B.,
To your question, the short answer is Y-E-S.
(Cf. the special policy now admitting asylees persecuted in the R.S.A.)
But don’t wait beyond January of ’29 …
And this: the most secure migration route may be via Maritime Canada; then work westward to Alberta (or eastern B.C.), crossing therefrom into Idaho (or western Montana / eastern WA), then generally southeastward down the Intermountain-West States toward whatever is your (their) destination / gathering point.
Best of Luck to You All, — R.L.W.
Kevin Kilty
July 5, 2026 8:21 am
In this thread someone asked good ol’ Grok about the emissivity of CO2. Here’s its answer:
”Emissivity for CO2 at <30°C and <1 atm: Given these conditions, the emissivity would likely be:
– Very close to zero for practical purposes. Let’s say, for an extremely rough estimate, somewhere around 0.001 or even less, depending on the exact conditions. This is because at such low temperatures and pressures, CO2’s interaction with thermal radiation is minimal.”
If this is what Grok answered, and my experience with AI suggests it could be easily, all this really does is point out the Achilles heel of AI — it can’t think and it can’t calculate.
First to even speak of “emissivity” for a gaseous substance requires an understanding of what “emissivity” means and how that concept could apply to a gaseous substance as opposed to condensed matter. Ignoring collisions between molecules, gaseous substances absorb and emit radiation in lines which are occasionally so densely spaced that people refer to them as “radiation bands”. Emissivity is merely a proportionality between what a substance emits at a particular condition compared to how a true black body would emit under the same conditions. It is a very low-order approximation for non-black body behavior.
Nonetheless, all one has to do to see the error of Grok’s explanation is to go to an actual textbook about engineering heat transfer, (you know, something built from actual thinking and measurement) and find a graph depicting the “emissivity equivalent” for CO2 in a mix of non-radiating gasses. Every textbook on the subject has such a graph. Nowhere on that graph does the equivalent emissivity of CO2 drop to a level anywhere near 0.001. In fact, the emissivity is actually rising as temperature drops below 300K. For the lower 2km of the atmosphere, at 400ppm CO2, that graph based on engineering measurements, shows that the emissivity of CO2 is near 0.2.
In detail you may have a point, but engineers employ the concept of “effective emissivity” of the atmosphere within an oven, furnace, boiler all the time, or at least whenever what they are interested in is the bulk heat transfer from combustion gasses to the enclosure. Thus to speak of ratio (emissivity) of emitted power of an atmosphere of various gasses to that which a black body would do at the same temperature makes perfectly good engineering sense.
If what you say were rigorously true (i.e. emissivity is meaningless) why would advanced engineering textbooks have the graph of emissivity as a function of temperature and pressure-path length?
The first is the ratio between radiation leaving a system and all the energy leaving the system, i.e. including the kinetic modes. (conduction, convection, advection (wind), latent (evap & cond)) Use this one for actual mass & energy calculations. For example: TFK_bams09 = 63/160=0.40
The second is the ratio between radiation leaving the system and the energy leaving were the system a BB at its temperature. For example: TFK_bams09 at 16 C = 63/396=0.16. This is used for correcting IR instruments. IR instruments are calibrated assuming the target is a BB. If it is not the operator is advised to spoof one with black paint or tape or a known value. Imaginary & not useful for thermal calculations.
BTW I have an experiment that demonstrates this. (Feynman)
Because of the significant (60% per TFK_bams09) non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see: https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
Search: Bruges group “boiling water pot” Schroeder
IMO radiation requires a defined surface. Gases don’t qualify. IR goes right through without attenuation. Stand before an IR heater. Planck’s work suggests that IR wave lengths are too long to interact at the molecular level.
High energy short waves, e.g. X-rays, shred molecules.
It’s a consensus seeking literature agglomerator with some copyright anti-infringement software piled on. Unfortunately so much incorrect stuff is written about the emissivity of CO2 that Grok’s algorithms have difficulty. Yes, Beware AI…
Emissivity is much like entropy, tossed around to impress yet clueless as to details.
Alan
July 5, 2026 9:00 am
Question on windmills. In 2021, a friend and I took a vacation driving across north Texas from Texarkana in the Northeast through the panhandle to New Mexico and Colorado. In some places it seemed there were windmills as far as the eye could see. Last year we drove the same route. There didn’t seem to be as many as in 2021. Are they starting to take them down or not replacing them as they tear up? Or just a faulty memory?
David Wojick
July 5, 2026 9:32 am
Power out for 20 hrs and counting. Hot. Hell of a holiday. Fourth outage over last month. Grid sick.
Not David W. but:
Gemini says multiple states have downed power lines due to weather in Midwest & Northeast: MI, NJ, PA, NY & CN. Total of several hundred thousand households affected.
IIRC PJM was predicted to be one of the most fragile grids this year.
MO has some major outages too, and I heard that the PJM was-um-fragile. It worries me as I’m on a co-op power outfit that just got bought by a subsidy farming electricity outfit in AR. We’ve been told to expect 20% increases in cost for, you know, upgrades, etc. I understand why that insurance CEO got popped. I don’t agree with it, but I understand the anger.
Just you wait. Governor Spanberger, a former CIA spook, will blame the outages on PJM’s failure to connect more cheap and plentiful wind and solar generation to the mid-Atlantic’s regional power grid.
Rational Keith
July 5, 2026 4:41 pm
Another attempt to blame productivity-enhancing chemicals for bad things:
The claim is that a bad wildfire season in Quebec resulted from use of glyphosate, which kills broad-leaf plants.
But Quebec does not use glyphosate.
(It is used by a few provinces to kill species that compete with conifers early in regrowth of forests.)
I recall that Quebec’s wildfire experience is better than other provinces because it is aggressive in jumping on fires early. That requires resources on ground and in air. It has its own fleet of ‘Canadairs’ – the scoopers that it leases a few of to California each year, publicized in a recent bad season near Los Angeles.
The paper also notes a problem I keep harping on – depending on other provinces and the US may not work when they have a bad season. In 2023 Quebec contracted with resources from ‘international’ sources, Mexico is often a source of labour.
BC is cheap IMJ without enough large tankers, it rejects a company based in BC that coverts C-130s, B-737s, and large helicopters then contracts them in the US, Australia, and South America.
The paper tries to blame Quebec’s bad 2023 season of wildfires on climate warming, claiming increasing frequency of bad seasons going back to 1847 and perhaps earlier (one paragraph bring the LIA in, but is difficult to understand).
A key factor in 2023 was drier than normal conditions resulting from an Atlantic area weather phenomenon. The paper claims increasing incidence of drought but I have not digested the reasoning.
(Adding to main post: dead vegetation increases heat of fire thus ultimately spread of fire. But the claim FAILs fundamentally.)
One must remember that the boreal forest has existed for several thousand years, expanding their carbon sequestration as glaciers retreated… but the mature trees are only a century and a bit old. Everywhere has burned before, likely several times per millennium. And all the fires were “wild”.
A common scam of eco-activists is talking as though they speak for everyone:
“Today’s announcement asks us to trade this legacy without accounting for what we might have to give up in return,” said Misty MacDuffee, director of the wild salmon program for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation.”
(That’s the outfit that pointed to the Tongass preserve in Alaska as evidence that cougars decimate deer populations – equating Vancouver Island to it. But there are no cougars there, the main predator is wolves.)
Tacked onto the end of an article reporting that tribe whose reservation a new pipeline would cross, the tribe is simply asking for details of the proposal.
The City of Vancouver BC is eliminating its prohibition against use of natural gas in new buildings.
But the city of Victoria BC continues to offer property tax relief to owners of apartment buildings who convert from natural gas for space and water heating to electricity. They’ve had very few takers. (Electricity prices in BC are relatively low because of hydroelectric generation.) I presume distribution of heat is by registers using hot water.
Natural gas has only been available on Vancouver Island for a few decades, so I presume the buildings originally used fuel oil fired boilers. (They look too new to have had coal fuel.) In contrast, the mainland has had natural gas since the 1950s, with spurs into the western US. (It comes from NE BC.)
Please consider three concise points about the analysis of “climate” response to emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and other trace non-condensing IR-active gases.
About models:
Not one of the pre-stabilized, time-step-iterated, parameter-tuned-to-hindcast climate models has ever had any diagnostic or prognostic authority concerning the influence of rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O on trends of any climate variable. This is because the step-wise computation of climate system response to incoming solar energy produces a rapid buildup of uncertainty far greater than the effect being investigated, for any emissions scenario. More here.
https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOE-HQ-2025-0207-0371
About space-based observation:
The high-resolution images from GOES East for Band 16 confirm that two factors dominate the local and overall longwave emission to space: The formation and dissipation of clouds, and the time dependence of skin surface response to the daily pulse of solar heating under clear skies. Attribution of any portion of the reported land or ocean temperature trends to rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O is not justified, considering how the land + ocean + atmosphere system exhibits such strong characteristics of powered operation, self-regulation, and horizontal mass and energy transport. The impressive influence of the water cycle is implied in these images, especially in time-lapse presentation. More here. Stop the video to read the full text description.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgjw6ViRq9k
About atmospheric dynamics:
The computed incremental IR absorbing power from rising concentrations of CO2, CH4, N2O and other IR-active trace gases in the atmosphere is not capable of exerting a perceptible and physically persistent “warming” influence on the climate system. This is because dynamic energy conversion (in W/m^2) within the general circulation, operating throughout the depth of the troposphere, massively overwhelms the static IR “warming” tendency (also in W/m^2). Therefore an assumption that TOA longwave emission to space is suppressed as a result (i.e. the core concept of GHG “forcing”), cannot be justified based on the spectral IR absorption characteristics of these gases alone, nor by spectral emission profiles observed from space or from the ground. More here, with background, references, plots, and a time-lapse video for visualizing the issue, based on the ERA5 hourly parameter “vertical integral of energy conversion.”
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1PDJP3F3rteoP99lR53YKp2fzuaza7Niz?usp=drive_link
That is all for now. Skeptics of climate alarm NEED NOT, and in my view OUGHT NOT, concede that *some* sensible heat gain down here is to be expected from what emissions of CO2 and the other IR-active non-condensing trace gases do in the atmosphere. No one knows that.
Thank you for your patient attention.
FYI: At the Mauna Loa Obs. in Hawaii, the concentrations of CO2 and CH4 in dry air are currently 432 ppmv an 1.93 ppmv, respectively. One cubic meter of this air has mass of 1,290 g and contains 0.85 g of CO2 and 1.93 mg of CH4. The small amounts of these greenhouse gases in the atmosphere cannot have any effect on air temperature, weather and climate.
The major processes for warming of the air are: heating of the earth’s surfaces by the absorption of sunlight, contact of air with the surfaces and warming of it by conduction, and by convection the warm air rises and heats up the atmosphere.
The main reason for the low concentrations of these gas in air is that they are absorbed by oceans and land surface waters.
Thank you for your reply. There is a variable IR coupling of the skin surface of land and oceans to the lower atmosphere at the interface. This is not to be dismissed as a factor in the net energy transfer to the air.
Hello Harold,
The major processes are described is these paragraphs with numbers
I verified all results with AI
Greenhouse gases do little to hinder the heating of the Earth by sunlight, but they absorb and re-emit IR radiation, making it a little harder for Earth to release IR radiation directly from its surface to space, and requiring slightly higher temperatures to get rid of the energy.
However, below the clouds, the most important greenhouse gas is hugely abundant water vapor, H₂O, not CO2, a trace gas at 0.043%. When combining the radiative effects of water vapor, liquid water droplets, and ice in clouds, H2O has a massive influence on the transfer and absorption of IR radiation; worldwide, at least a 10-15 times greater than CO₂.
The Tropics: The area between the Tropic of Cancer, 23.5 degree N, and the Tropic of Capricorn, 23.5 degree S, is about 40% of the earth surface. The Tropics area is about 78% ocean and 22% land. The tropics area generates 300 to 400 billion metric ton of water vapor each day. The rest of the world area, about 60%, 100 to 150 billion metric ton; thus, a 50% greater area generates water vapor only about 1/3 of the tropics!
The Ocean Surface in the Tropics: The IR photon emission from an ocean surface at 26 C is about 438 W/m^2, the upward radiant energy flux. Near the ocean surface, because the water vapor ppm is about 26,000, much larger than the CO2 ppm at 425, the influence of water vapor on the transfer and absorption of IR radiation of surface photons is about 20 – 25% (109.5 W/m^2), whereas CO2 is about 1% (4.4 W/m^2); this shows CO2 minimally adds to the world’s “baseline” temperature.
The remaining upward radiant energy flux, about 75%, is quickly transferred 5 – 10% by collisions that warm air molecules (mainly N2 and O2), 65 – 70% by evaporating huge quantities of ocean water.
NOTE: As ocean temperatures drop from 26 C to 5 C, the H2O ppm drops from 26,000 ppm to 6,746 ppm. H2O transfer and absorption drops from 109.5 W/m^2 to 23.5 W/m^2 (a big drop). CO2 transfer and absorption drops from 4.4 W/m^2 to 3.3 W/m^2 (a small drop); even at these cold ocean temperatures, the H2O effect is at least 7 times the CO2 effect.
In the lower atmosphere up to the bottom of clouds, as water vapor partially condenses, it releases latent heat, which converts into sensible heat, which by collisions, warms the surrounding air (mainly N2 and O2), causing air to rise. This is a second warming source subsequent to the above upward surface radiant energy flux.
Above the clouds and Atmospheric Window: At higher elevations, H2O ppm is much less, whereas CO2 ppm is only slightly less, and temperatures and densities of air are much less. About 70% of photons transfer their energy by collisions with N2 and O2 in the lower atmosphere, the rest radiatively interact with GHGs.
Neither CO2 nor H20 efficiently absorb 8 to 12 um surface photons, which, if evading collision in the lower atmosphere, will, in the higher atmosphere, experience minimal collisions and freely travel to space. An excited CO2 molecule is much more likely to release its energy by emitting a photon in a random direction, including space, instead of a colliding with another molecule.
At the colder temperatures, the atmosphere shifts entirely to longer wavelengths (greater than 15 um), due to the quantum mechanical structure of the CO2 molecule. CO2 has very small absorption windows at these longer wavelengths, any photons mostly go to space unimpeded. Radiative transfer is only part of what controls Earth’s climate; one pathway.
Another pathway is the huge quantities of water vapor and warm air transported by air and ocean currents from the tropics, where maximum sunlight is absorbed, to polar regions, where much more IR radiation is released to space than is absorbed from the Sun. CO2, a trace gas at 0.0425%, has a very minor influence.
The Tropics are Hugely Important for the World’s Weather: Globally, about 2.5 to 3.0 trillion metric tons of water evaporate each day; the tropics account for about 2.0 to 2.5 trillion metric tons each day.
Because of the high heat of evaporation of ocean water (2,260,000 J/kg) an enormous quantity of energy is added. The water vapor, along with air warmed by colliding with the water vapor and water surface, is lifted up to about 10,000 – 20,000 ft, where the water vapor condenses to clouds, then all of it is transported by prevailing winds to northern latitudes. The air and water vapor is being replenished by prevailing trade winds and sea currents. In addition, sea currents, such as the Gulf Stream, carry warm water from the Gulf of Mexico to West Europe.
NOTE: Evaporating one metric ton of water requires about 2,442,000 kJ of solar energy; for comparison, 1 metric ton of crude oil is about 41,868,000 kJ. World crude oil consumption is about 14.0 million metric ton per day
In fact, the climate of the Earth has no single control knob, and all theoretical and empirical evidence points to CO₂ being a relatively unimportant factor.
That means relative to dynamic energy conversion within the general circulation, the IR absorbing power related to annual additions of CO2 ppm is negligible – vanishingly weak – inconsequential
Wil, as I point out in https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/09/12/why-albedo-is-the-wrong-measure-of-reflectivity-for-modeling-climate/ , Fresnel’s equation demonstrates that the reflectivity of liquid water varies in a very non-linear fashion with the angle of incidence. What I didn’t dwell on in the article is that the light that penetrates the water, and is capable of warming it, is (1-reflectivity). Also, the spectral distribution of the EM radiation that is reflected approaches that of the source and the amount penetrating (crossing the air/water boundary) approaches zero as the reflected light approaches the limit of 100%. To deal with the processes accurately, requires the integration of the Fresnel function over the surface of water over time. As with Grey Body thermal emissions, an average value is not going to be close to the correct value because of the non-linear nature of the functions.
“In the lower atmosphere up to the bottom of clouds, as water vapor partially condenses, it releases latent heat, which converts into sensible heat, which by collisions, warms the surrounding air (mainly N2 and O2), causing air to rise. This is a second warming source subsequent to the above upward surface radiant energy flux.”
Much too simple a description of the energy conversions occurring in a a rising column of humid air! Always keep in mind that condensation is an isothermal process, which means that saying that “latent heat,,, converts into sensible heat” is very misleading.
First, we know that the amount of latent energy released by condensation depends on temperature (directly) and pressure (inversely), and that both P and T reduce, generally, with altitude. We observe that the P/T conditions which can support condensation occur everywhere from sea level (fog) to several kilometers up (ice). We also know that, while surface pressure is relatively constant, surface temperature varies widely from the tropics to the poles, therefore the P/T profile with altitude varies accordingly.
Next, we know that rising humid air can contain energy in many forms: latent, of course, but also pressure, internal (heat), potential (gravity), kinetic (velocity), chemical (action with nucleating elements), and electric (lightning). Any or all of these forms of energy may be involved in direct or indirect conversions as a kilogram of rising water vapor approaches the conditions that will support isothermal condensation. For example, if the changing P/T ratio results in excess latent energy, this may be absorbed in increasing potential or kinetic energy, or in maintaining a temperature against a falling pressure without condensation.
Yes, I agree, the transfer and transportation of energy within the atmosphere is endlessly complicated.
I do mention, at the ocean surface, the reduction in prominence of H2O vapor from 26 C to 4 C. But even at 4 C, H2O vapor is 7 times more prominent than CO2.
The Fresnel issue, brought up by Clyde, is an additional factor that needs to be quantified from tropics to poles.
Good points. A similar analogy might be that if you consider the erosion of the rock cliffs of Niagara Falls, the erosion might eventually work it’s way all across Lake Erie to Toledo Ohio. It’s like forecasting that flushing the toilets in the Niagara Falls visitors center is destroying Toledo and therefore requiring that all visitors to the falls must wear diapers instead of using the toilets.
Thank you for your reply. I have family on Grand Island just upstream of Niagara Falls. Maybe I should tell them to moderate their water usage to “save Toledo.” 🙂
And take out the entire US, if we wait a long time.
It is hard to tell if the social media posts from certain groups that are still pushing the CO2 / (CH4 is 1234.567 times stronger than CO2) narrative is driven by legitimate research anymore. But with the considerable reductions in SO2 emissions over the last two decades, and the indisputable physics behind Anthropogenic SO2 emission perturbing incoming sunlight, there is no research being done to compute how hot will this planet if all SO2 emissions are removed. The research that is out there explains the effects by statements such as “SO2 make clowd top shinny. at id wefwects sunlii”. Instead of the decades long emission of shipping fuels that were 3.5% Sulfur content were carried into the upper troposphere by convection, combined with water vapor and UV radiation to form Sulfuric Acid aerosols which are highly reflective. A 1% change of incoming across the Pacific Ocean dwarfs just about any forcing one could conjure up.
Thank you for your reply. I agree that the effects of SO2 emissions should not be ignored. I note that another significant change was the switch to ULSD (ultra low sulfur diesel fuel) beginning in 2006 and fully implemented by the early 2010’s in the U.S. This meant that all #2 fuel oil for heating was also supplied at the low sulfur limits. This is a case where “more research” is justified.
The common claim, which is not justified, is that methane has a global warming potential ~80X that of CO2, which is wrong for a number of reasons: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/03/06/the-misguided-crusade-to-reduce-anthropogenic-methane-emissions/
The emissivity of CO2 at atmospheric pressure and temperature is near zero.
Here is Grok’s answer to my question.
”Emissivity for CO2 at <30°C and <1 atm: Given these conditions, the emissivity would likely be:
– Very close to zero for practical purposes. Let’s say, for an extremely rough estimate, somewhere around 0.001 or even less, depending on the exact conditions. This is because at such low temperatures and pressures, CO2’s interaction with thermal radiation is minimal.”
Thank you for your reply. Tell me please, which statement in my post are you responding to?
Mkelly….do an image search on Hottel charts….look closely…those lines are bar-cm…meant for furnace combustion chambers and were developed in the 1950’s for very wide band emissions….so yeah…in that combustion chamber size range, the effective emissivity in a combustion chamber of the CO2 is pretty low per cm of beam length…..now multiply by the number of cm thick that the atmosphere is….to see what the effective emissivity of CO2 is…as far as a satellite sensor looking at the ground. Hmmm, much bigger…hmmm can easily be over 1.0….hmmm maybe shouldn’t use for atmospheric CO2…especially with low temps off the chart to the left where they steeply climb….
And Hottel would have been ecstatic with Hitran…
Irrespective of the many things you and I agree on, this one is simply not right, or maybe is not explained well.
I feel like being a difficult person today, so I’m going to explain why I disagree with you. Some days ago I tried to illustrate using some satellite images that the radiational behavior of CO2 is independent of the dynamics of bulk heat transfer — near IR, thermal IR, it doesn’t matter. This is the reason, which I tried to explain to N. Shroeder not long ago, why one can use a thermal IR “thermometer” to measure skin temperature on a human being despite the fact that half the heat loss of the human body is the result of convection. One does not need an understanding of the dynamics of heat being carried away from skin by air currents and water vapor to measure skin temperature — just IR emitted power with a clear view of skin surface.
Radiation as a means of heat transport works in parallel independently of bulk mechanisms in many instances, which is what I think you mean by “dynamics”. Now clouds complicate the picture quite a bit, but above some level, say a few kilometers above the surface, radiation becomes the dominant heat transfer mechanism, and CO2 contributes a not negligible effort to it.
The convection you mention is a factor in cooling of the surface. It determines the rate of cooling. Radiation only measures the exact temperature at a point in time. If one were to measure the temperature on a continuous basis, one would find out that the rate of cooling would not be explained entirely by radiation change alone.
Of course, Jim, that why I say it is a parallel mechanism. Eventually at altitude, you must know, it is the only mechanism available. However, to say that radiation only measures temperature and has no impact on the temperature itself is going to get you in trouble with the First Law of Thermodynamics.
Thank you for this reply, Kevin.
“Radiation as a means of heat transport works in parallel independently of bulk mechanisms in many instances, which is what I think you mean by “dynamics”.”
When I say “dynamic energy conversion” I mean precisely this:
https://codes.ecmwf.int/grib/param-db/162064
With this additional context about the meteorological conventions for internal, potential, latent, and kinetic energy.
https://codes.ecmwf.int/grib/param-db/162061
Longwave radiation emitted from a unit mass of air at any instant is at the expense of internal energy (as defined within the meteorological discipline.) Longwave radiation absorbed into a unit mass of air at any instant increases internal energy.
But at any instant, at any altitude, the internal energy state of a unit mass of air is not constrained by absorbed or emitted longwave radiation. If a unit mass of air at, say, high altitude is experiencing compression heating associated with downward vertical velocity and positive energy conversion [kinetic energy] -> [internal energy + potential energy] then its internal energy increases and its longwave emission will increase. If it is experiencing expansion cooling associated with upward vertical velocity and negative energy conversion [internal energy + potential energy] -> [kinetic energy] then its internal energy decreases and longwave emission will decrease. These dynamic processes are many orders of magnitude stronger, in determining the internal energy state of a unit mass of air at any instant, than the absorption of longwave radiation from any direction, or the emission of longwave radiation in any direction.
The internal energy state and the longwave radiation are not separate channels acting independently.
“…but above some level, say a few kilometers above the surface, radiation becomes the dominant heat transfer mechanism, and CO2 contributes a not negligible effort to it.”
OK, but on this point, please consider spending a bit more time with this post from March and its supporting plots of vertical velocity and the scatter plots of vertical velocity vs vertical integral of energy conversion. Pressure levels of 300 hPa, 500 hPa, and 700 hPa are analyzed.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/03/15/open-thread-181/#comment-4174555
All the best to you.
Whenever Dibbell or Kilty writes a comment here at WUWT….I find it worth my morning coffee to read in detail and appreciate where they are coming from.
Hello again Kevin,
Last week this was an additional response to you that I’m not sure you’ve seen.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/06/28/open-thread-196/#comment-4212471
I make no claim, and it would not be correct, that dynamic energy conversion should be expected to obscure the narrow spectral signatures of absorption of near IR or thermal IR for CO2.
There is no contradiction with my more general conclusion as I have stated and you have quoted, “This is because dynamic energy conversion (in W/m^2) within the general circulation, operating throughout the depth of the troposphere, massively overwhelms the static IR “warming” tendency (also in W/m^2).” By “”warming” tendency” I am referring to the magnitude of the assumed climate “forcing” for 2XCO2, not the particulars within the spectrum. Sure, you can still “see” the IR signatures for CO2 due to absorption within those bands, as total-column values in clear conditions. But those properties do not constrain the overall full-spectrum emission to space.
Thanks again for your comments.
Warmists really have no idea about uncertainty other than as you increase data points in an average, the uncertainty decreases. This just isn’t the case, but convincing them will take work.
The warmists insist that an average insolation determined by spreading the “pulse” over 24 hours will allow correct calculations is a joke. They ignore the 3D geometry, trigonometry, and necessity of integrating over time. Not scientific at all.
The Stern gang – The gaslighting goes on. Nicholas Stern believes he is the expert’s expert nowadays…
Make Ed Miliband chancellor, ex-chief Treasury adviser tells Andy Burnham
Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy
He backed Miliband’s moratorium on additional drilling licences in the North Sea for oil and gas – Guardian
The UK is heading in the opposite direction to plain common economic sense. Even Blair felt the need to speak up…
Blair warns Burnham: Don’t raise capital gains tax
Former PM’s think tank tells leader-in-waiting that targeting investors will damage economy Telegraph
Tax increases are the order of the day be it Starmer or Burnham in the chair.
And no word on being absolutely defenceless…
Burnham makes me uneasy, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt to see if he can actually get a grip on Whitehall.
But Ed Milliband scares me and must come nowhere near the country’s purse strings ……or the new Cabinet. One can only hope at this point.
I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt
And there we part company. He has failed on two attempts at the Labour leadership. Against mad Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn. His supposed triumphs in Manchester are in reality the product of his predecessors policies.
His first big idea – given the state of the nation, defence and the economy etc – is to duplicate No 10 (expenses, staff etc) in the North (Manchester). Then it’s on to increasing taxation from the dead to creating a real North South divide.
Burnham has declared war on the South. Your homes and savings are no longer safe
London and the South East already vastly subsidise the rest of the country. The answer is to liberate the North, not seize southern wealth – Telegraph
I wrote him off a long time ago. And he is, apparently, better than the entire 400 plus Labour MPs who are already in the House. That certainly beats the Tories.
And don’t forget our Andy rang around 26 constituencies trying to persuade the sitting MP to stand down. He got lucky on no 27 in Makerfield.
Don’t.
Burnham is intending to create his own fiefdom in the North where we will all be subservient to our masters. He’s as ideologically as far left as they come.
Tax increases are fine but only if they help support more migrants.
You are a Liberal Democrat and I claim the Tenner…
I really love Britain, so its slow suicide is painful to watch. I’ll take two fivers as long as they are plastic.
Then you are not a Lib Dem… In Oxfordshire they went to the High Court to get English CSG flags banned during the World Cup
Unauthorised flags – High Court injunction granted on 23 June 2026
Their sister council in West Berkshire is giving newbuild properties to Afghans and Ukrainians who leapfrog over the thousands who have been on the waiting list for social housing for years. We have military veterans sleeping on the streets. They never get a thought.
Good luck to you.
English flag featuring the Cross of Saint George (CSG) is a red cross on a white field
It’s even worse to experience
From what I have read, a great schism has developed in the UK, and both sides detest the current government.
At the same time, their electric grid is very fragile, and they depend on just-in-time deliveries of LNG, a result of being able to store only a couple of days of reserve. One cold snap this year will either send prices soaring, a result of buying lng on the open market, or a widespread outage. Or both events could happen, soaring costs followed by a blackout.
One can’t help but speculate that such an event could be the final straw to break the camel’s back. We could see a mass uprising of two factions, each trying to overthrow the government and take power. Are we going to see the collapse of an industrialized country?
Get those two fivers before they turn into microplastic.
“Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy”
This has to be one of the greatest lying-by-omission quotes I’ve ever seen. Nurtured by decades of BBC- and Guardian-thinking at the Satanic level, to which only the London elites can aspire. If our football team was at this level, we’d be hammering Mexico 10-0 tonight in Mexico City.
So what is the full no-omissions, reality quote, one might ask ?
“Nicholas Stern joins growing number backing Miliband, saying he has vision and experience to revive economy, which is how he knows exactly how to continue to destroy the UK economy”.
Congratulations Old Nick, you are the GOAT:
That growing number…
a growing number of senior academics and officials
Right thinking academics and quangos/civil service. The very antithesis of democracy and the very essence of the technocracy.
Anybody who thinks Miliband has ‘vision’ is himself as blind as a Covid bat.
Miliband has vision!
Stern just demonstrated his own lack of vision. Thinking Miliband has vision is about as divorced from reality as one can get.
The UK is in Big Trouble. It is being led by Leftwing fools and imbeciles, who think they have it all figured out. They don’t, they just think they do.
Stupidity must be a contagious disease.
Germany, France Italy and Spain are in big trouble as well.
NATO just voted to “loan”, interest free, $70 billion for 2027 to Ukraine for 1) conducting war, 2) run the rest of the country.
However, the significance of the liberation of Konstantinowka cannot be overestimated.
Politically speaking, this means the exposure of the entire media campaign, which claimed that the balance of power had shifted and that the Ukrainian armed forces were on the advance (something Zelenskyy forcefully drilled into the West and the media).
In societal terms, this means the end of the illusion that Zelenskyy had implanted in Ukrainians, namely that the Ukrainian armed forces could hold their ground in the Donetsk region. But the road to Slavyansk and Kramatorsk is now open. All Ukrainians know that these cities cannot be held.
From a military perspective, the collapse of the Ukrainian defense has occurred in Konstantinowka. The defensive structures and fortifications, built up over 12 years, since 2014, have crumbled. And this at the end—within just a few days.
The entire war machine of Ukraine—tens of thousands of drones and soldiers, elite units, and the most valuable resources deployed to defend Konstantinowka—proved insufficient. The city was taken by small assault troops of the Russian armed forces. And here, neither missiles nor F-16 fighter jets nor attacks on the oil refinery in Tatarstan could do anything.
And this is no stroke of luck. A week ago, the Ukrainian armed forces’ Defense Minister A. R. Belousov reported to us military correspondents not only about the advance of our soldiers through the streets, but literally from building to building.
The complexity of the work accomplished is almost indescribable. The organization of a THOUSAND ATTACKS DAILY—by air force, missiles, artillery, as well as air and ground drones.
The detection and neutralization of every firing position in every window and every corner before our assault troops arrive there.
The supply and control of thousands of small groups in real time. The work done by the Ministry of Defense is simply colossal.
And what do the Ukrainian and Western generals see? If the Russians managed to do this in Konstantinowka, they will also succeed eight kilometers further on—in Slavyansk.
This is a major defeat, one more, for the NATO trained/supplied/financed-Ukrainian army. Only two fortress cities remain to be taken: Kramatorsk and Sloviansk. After that, the road will be wide open to Kyiv and Odesa for the Russian army.
Russia offered a 2-day cease fire, so Ukraine could collect the bodies, but Ukraine refused.
I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I don’t know what to believe when I hear contradictory claims. However, for whoever provided the down-vote, If you disagree with what wilpost said, I think you should provide counter evidence, or at least reasons for a different interpretation, rather than just down-voting.
Clyde, thank you.
Those folks have contrary opinions based of what they are fed by the Western Mass Media, which is dutifully hyping “successes” of Ukraine, and that Russia will soon collapse.
It would be embarrassing for NATO and the EU not to have these “successes”, after all the money and effort that has and is being spent.
Those folks do not look at a range of sources on their own to get more balanced info.
Often, they are dismal products of mind-numbing, E-12 state education and state liberal arts college education systems.
The left always has a “vision” to perfect society and mankind. And it always involves complete control of the masses by the elite and government.
Of course those on the left are also convinced that they are the elite and the only ones smart enough to be allowed to make decisions.
To the above 3 or 4 responses to me, yes Miliband has the vision of a sixth form schoolboy whose political development stopped there. Stern, however, has a vision that has always appeared more sinister. It could be just the regular garden variety greed though, who knows?
3-2 will do 😊
Burnham thinks he was the Mayor of Manchester in his previous life, but in fact he was the Sheriff of Nottingham.
Yeah, tunnel vision
Paul Pelosi is doing his part to get vehicles off the road. It seems he mounted a hit and run on a parked Tesla in Yountville making it inoperable and then he drove off before his own car conked out.
https://www.kcra.com/article/nancy-pelosi-husband-paul-charge-napa-county-hit-and-run/71823395
His Karma met its Dharma … tragically —
— ’twas another Story-in-5-Words.
In the sequel, implicate his Mater-Ma.
(Why do all these bad things keep happening to Queen Nancy-P.?]
In the prequel, his head met a hammer.
Yes, and the guy who mysteriously got into his house with the hammer is now doing 30 years without parole in a maximum security prison. When he gets Epsteined, you can say you read it here first.
In the same state, actual murderers get only a couple of years in jail. I guess their really is two standards of justice, depending on who you attack.
And in Washington DC the President lets out vandals who assault cops. And if he gets his way he will pay them. What is happening to the USA?
Democrats let out hordes of their zombies to trash Tesla cars and sales yards
Then in Minnesota, Walz and co let out hordes of zombies to assault federal officers doing there lawful duty for weeks at a time.
Then Ilhan Omah let out hordes of fraudsters to steal American money and send it back to Al-Shabaab terrorists.
Bass in California went of holidays while the Palisades burnt to the ground.
For 4 year USA had a mentally absent President and his minders signed everything with an auto-pen.
What is happening to the USA…
It is now starting to recover, slowly, under a new President.
They aren’t Republicans, therefor they have a right to their own laws, as well as their own facts.
Well said, bnice2000
Socialists really do believe that they are entitled to their own facts.
Those of Simon’s ilk are unbelievably self-righteous.
I’m going to translate that for you Clyde. People like Simon think law and order are worth upholding irrespective of who is the lawbreaker.
A law should not be upheld if it is patently unconstitutional. Also, both police and district attorneys frequently decide not to prosecute in the cases of insufficient evidence, case loads that strain the resources of the department and priority has to be given to the most serious ‘crimes.’ ‘Discretion’ is often used, particularly by police officers, when there are extenuating circumstances.
If the framers of the Constitution agreed with you, they wouldn’t have given the President the power to grant pardons and amnesties. The system is working as designed. You may disagree with with the decisions made by the president, but you aren’t the president so what you think doesn’t matter. He is operating within the guidelines of the law.
Did Trump release the Jan 6 rioters? Answer Yes
Did these rioters assault police officers and vandalise property? Answer Yes
Did Trump say he wanted to give these criminals money? Answer Yes
No lies there Mark.
Please provide evidence that Trump released people who attacked police in the next open thread.
Trump did pardon a lot of people involved in Jan 6, but these were not people accused of attacking police. Those people did not get pardons.
I think you are confusing the issues.
Here you go Tom. Took 20 seconds…
On his first day in office, Donald Trump issued sweeping Proclamation 10887 granting full pardons and clemency to virtually all of the nearly 1,600 people charged or convicted for their roles in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. [1, 2]
This mass pardon included hundreds of individuals who were convicted of violently assaulting law enforcement officers and obstructing police using deadly weapons like flag poles, chemical irritants, batons, and stun guns. [1, 2, 3]
Key Facts & Actions:
Did Trump repeatedly ask Nancy Pelosi to accept the reading and waiting 10,000 National Guard troops, but she refused, as stated by her own daughter, and testimony by Capitol Police, who were desperately unable to cope.
Did the FBI infiltrate the rioters to goad them on?
Yes, they did according to the head of the FBI.
“Did Trump repeatedly ask Nancy Pelosi to accept the reading and waiting 10,000 National Guard troops, but she refused, as stated by her own daughter, and testimony by Capitol Police, who were desperately unable to cope.”
Nope that is a Trump lie and a poor one at that. So easy to check so why didn’t you?
“Did the FBI infiltrate the rioters to goad them on?”
Nope another BS lie. Also easy to check. This was investigated and found to a ridiculous fabricated story.
Trump is credible to the gullible. Your two silly stories a fine example.
And now your “corrupter in chief” is interfering in the football world cup by getting a red card annulled. Outrageous!!!! If the US win this game against Belgium it will be a disgrace…..
Everything Trump touches turns to shite. Another step lower he goes…..
Belgium should decide the game on the field and stop whining about who they have to play.
FIFA gave Belgium an appeal of the decision so maybe Belgium can still manage not to play against the best U.S. player.
Our foreign guests have fallen in love with the United States. They say their media paints a false picture of life in America. They say everyone they meet in America is friendly to them.
This is that “Dark Place” that the new leader of the UK uses to describe Trump’s America.
The people did not find a dark place here.
Here’s a hint: You can’t believe a damn thing the Leftwing Media tells you.
Hear, Hear!
Everything you have written here Tom has nothing to do with the fact Trump has put his corrupt fingers on the scales again to gain an unfair advantage for his team. There are rules in sport for a reason…. to keep things fair. And this rule says, if you get a red card then you don’t play in the next game.
Every other team plays by them except it seems Trumps team…. again.
According to Politico
FIFA declined to confirm any specific discussions but reiterated to POLITICO that the decision to suspend the one-match ban was made by an independent disciplinary committee.
and
FIFA insists that the decision was an independent one made by its 18-person disciplinary committee
Independent decision? Ha ha…. Of course it was.
I see, so you are choosing to believe FIFA is lying because it suits your prejudice.
Nope. I’m choosing to believe FIFA is lying because Infantino is a corrupt piece of garbage who has made it obvious he wants to have a piece of the pie Trump is offering him, in exchange for …”favours.”
We will never know but I suspect the interference by Trump was part of the reason the USA got thrashed today. I think all the bad press and (justified) attention would have unsettled them. It was the worst I had seen them play. Up till now, they were great.
“Belgium should decide the game on the field and stop whining about who they have to play.”
they didn’t decide to play they were made to. And they whipped the US team resoundingly. But that is an aside to the corruption between Infantino and Trump.
“FIFA gave Belgium an appeal of the decision so maybe Belgium can still manage not to play against the best U.S. player.”
It is totally irrelevant whether the res carded player is the best the US has. In a just world if you do the crime you do the time.
“Our foreign guests have fallen in love with the United States. They say their media paints a false picture of life in America. They say everyone they meet in America is friendly to them.”
I‘m sure some of this is true, but I don’t see what it has to do with Trump abusing his power to cheat.
“This is that “Dark Place” that the new leader of the UK uses to describe Trump’s America.
The people did not find a dark place here.”
That’s good to hear. The World Cup is the biggest sporting event on the planet. Great to hear the supporters have loved it. I must say I certainly have.
“Here’s a hint: You can’t believe a damn thing the Leftwing Media tells you.”
Can I finish this by turning it around. Imagine if this event was being held in Russia and Putin did what Trump has just done. There would be justifiable outrage, and yet here we have those on the right trying to support Trump in his cheating. I just don’t get it. Is MAGA really that powerful? If so, that is frightening.
He asked for a review, and it was suspended, not annulled, in accordance with Title 27 of their own rules.
We all know what “asking” means when it comes from Trump.
It means being sent to the gulag if they don’t comply?
And this rule says, if you get a red card then you don’t play in the next game
Except for the other times a red card has been suspended, always in accordance with their own rules.
Final score…. Integrity 4 corruption 1. Praise the Lord.
Socialists believe they are entitled to their on beliefs, no matter, after implementing with op money, they turn out to be disastrous, which is denied, and more op money is thrown at them until it all blows up, like in the UK, the poster child of a failed state, soon to be Third World.
I just cannot believe an idiot like Miliband is still in his position, instead of in jail.
and the DC police chiefs let off without penalty officer an who shot from cover to kill an unarmed protestor without warning.
The only violent death by murder on Jan 6 was unarmed veteran Ashli Babbitt.
She was part of a group attacking the capital and was climbing through a window she should not have been. She must have known there would be armed officers there. I am not saying she should have been shot, but it was an extremely risky thing to do. Some would say stupid.
You don’t know what Ashley Babbitt was doing when she was shot and killed. She was on the other side of a locked door and the cop shot her through the window of the door.
How much danger was the cop in when he is behind a door armed and is facing unarmed people?
I think Trump should investigate this killing.
Biden let the perp off, and threw the book at hundreds of innocent people. The people Trump later pardoned and who deserve compensation for the way they were treated.
You are rewriting history Tom. I know exactly what she was doing. I can read.
What happened? “Ashli Babbitt was a 35-year-old U.S. Air Force veteran and staunch supporter of Donald Trump who was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer while attempting to climb through a broken window of a barricaded door leading to the Speaker’s Lobby during the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.”
The Incident: Babbitt was part of a mob seeking to overturn the 2020 election results and gain access to the House chamber. She was shot in the shoulder by Lt. Michael Byrd, who fired a single shot as she attempted to breach the barricaded doorway. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
The Investigations: Multiple internal and federal investigations—including by the U.S. Capitol Police and the Department of Justice—cleared Officer Byrd of any wrongdoing, concluding that he reasonably fired in self-defense and to protect members of Congress.
“How much danger was the cop in when he is behind a door armed and is facing unarmed people?”
He would know he was facing a large number of people screaming and yelling trying to breach an area he was there to guard. I think it is utterly unbelievable that you think this cop should ignore an angry mob storming the building. He is paid to defend the elected politicians inside that building. It is why he is armed. If this was reversed and it was a bunch of democrat hooligans trying to get in, I feel comfortable saying you would not be writing what you did.
No, she was included in a group on one side of a glass magnetic door.
On the other side was a Capitol Police shooter who fired at the group through the glass and fatally struck Ashley
Excessive force, even by a LEO, is against the law. Therefore, the officer was breaking the law that you respect so much. In the USA, the death penalty is not authorized for stupidity.
Well given there were “multiple” federal and internal investigations that found the officer to have acted properly….. I’m fine to let it go. Now let’s see how the investigations into the murders of the two by the ICE agents go?
It’s crazy how you can see a cop shooting into a crowd as ok, but a cop shooting at someone trying to run him over as “murder”
One was attempting to drive away…. the other was storming the capital building with a raging mob trying to subvert the democratic process. Yep I can see a difference. See if you can?
Attempting to drive away INTO an officer. The officer in front of the car was under an immediate and specific threat. The other one was firing blindly into a crowd. You are choosing to see only what you want to see.
But what’s the point of trying to explain this to you? You’ll never understand, because you don’t want to. You have made that clear.
I understand you wear a Maga hat that blinds you. Take it off and have a look at the footage. She was shot through the side window, her steering wheel turned to drive away. But let’s wait till the inquiry… oh that’s right her inquiry has stalled because of white house intervention. More corruption from Trump. Still you will love that. Your messiah can do no wrong.
Three shots, Simon, one through the front. A person trained to shoot doing what they’re trained to do, during a tense situation in which he was actually struck by the vehicle. (yes, I’ve seen the footage, and not just what CNN aired)
You believe a general with a grudge who reports something about Trump you like, despite no corroborating evidence. You dismiss a statement by an international organization that is favorable to Trump, despite evidence to the contrary.
You find a cop shooting blindly into a crowd and killing a Trump supporter to be acceptable, and point to the investigation by a Democrat administration as exoneration. You call a cop shooting in self-defense at the driver of a car heading toward him murder, despite the lack of any such conviction or even charge, and call the Republican administration that decided it was a good shoot corrupt.
You apply rules differently depending on the team. Your hypocrisy is blindingly clear to anyone looking at this objectively.
But what is also clear is that there is nothing further to be gained in this discussion, so I’m out.
“You apply rules differently depending on the team. Your hypocrisy is blindingly clear to anyone looking at this objectively.”
Nope I’m consistent. I say wait for the investigation with Good. I have an opinion but happy to wait as I did with the cop who shot the intruder on Capital Hill.
Been pretty well documented that Fifa has issues with corruption. The last guy (Sepp Blatter) left because he was bent as hell. Infantino’s BS Fifa peace prize to Trump told us all we need to know about their relationship.
And just to prove my consistency, I’m more than happy to see Graham Platner go. Politics is no place for a sex criminal, which is why it is so puzzling you guys support the convicted sex criminal Trump. So let’s see how consistent you are. You think someone who is a convicted sex crim should be president?
I would have explained to the judge and jury that it was common knowledge the Pelosis liked to get hammered.
Well Nancy will have to use her extraordinary investing skills to help with his defense.
Nancy just provided the insider tips to her husband, who regularly beat all investment pros by a large margin. It is called insider trading, which is illegal,
All Congress members do the same.
Pocahontas, 1/1024 real Native American, did the same and amassed over $100 million
Maybe it’s time to take the car keys away from this guy.
He can afford a driver. Nancy made a lot of money while in Congress.
“Made” is an extremely flexible word.
I read that he told the arresting LEO that he thought that he might have hit something.
Most drunks have fuzzy memories
Funny how the ‘elites’ seem to often have reprehensible behavior.
Celebration
Trump can definitely put on a good party!
I see where the Kurds of western Iran are starting to clash with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
I think Trump should provide air cover for the Kurds in any battles they have with the IRGC. This will guarantee the Kurds will win the fight, and this is just the kind of situation you want in order to attack the IRGC.
Let’s get this revolution started with the Kurds fighting back, and as they succeed, the other Iranians who hate the Mullahs will join in the fight. It’s time to oust the religious fanatics from power.
The IRGC cannot win a battle if U.S. forces get involved. If the IRGC forms up in large attack formations, they will be “sitting ducks” for American air power. So the objective of those who want to overthrow the Mullahs should be to get the IRGC to react on a large scale. American air power would wipe them off the battlefield in very short order.
A couple of big military defeats for the IRGC on the ground and it will be all over for the Mullahs.
Let’s get this new revolution going using Kurds and others as our infantry, and U.S. air power will take care of the rest. Our Kurdish/Iranian infantry won’t have to do much serious fighting as U.S. air power will take care of that for them. All they have to do is pose a threat to the IRGC, enough to get them moving. Then: BOOM! No more IRGC!
Trying to deal with religious fanatics is a losing proposition. Once Trump comes to this conclusion, the above scenario should be implemented.
Lets hear a big cheer for more war–just what we need.
Quite a few people are unwilling to fight evil until it is at their own doorstep.
Or in this case, is dropping nuclear weapons on their neighborhood.
As a disabled combat veteran of the VietNam war, I have first hand experience with our needless interventions and BS wars, and the lasting effects on the men who fight them.
Being a disabled combat veteran does not make you an expert on foreign affairs.
I also served in Vietnam. I volunteered for the army and I volunteered for Vietnam because I supported stopping communism over there rather than having to do it later in the United States.
I still support that position.
You drank the Cool Aid
You did not stop Communism in Vietnam!
The north retook the south. Made Vietnam whole again.
South folks who could fled like rats from a sinking ship
What I find egregious is the MSM is not reminding the reading public about the documented dangers of nuclear weapons fallout, which led to bans on even above-ground testing. Even though the USA and the rest of the world will probably be immune to the blast effects of a short-lived war initiated by Iran, the rest of the world can expect to see an increase in the radiation-induced cancers, especially among our children and grand-children. I find it interesting that liberals were typically the most out-spoken opponents of war and particularly nuclear weapons, yet they have been as quiet as the proverbial church mice with respect to the consequences of radioactive fallout. It seems that their irrational hatred of Trump is their guidance for their definition of morality. They take every opportunity to whine about Trump, and never give him credit for the things he does even when it is obvious that preventing nuclear proliferation is desirable.
The Left is just irrational: Period.
Much worse than that
“Off the charts lunatics” comes to mind, for starters.
Look at the black guy with the cane.
And that deranged purple-haired woman?
And the deranged pervert running for Senator of Maine, and Bernie hugging kissing him.
I know such people exist, but in the Congress?
Let us get our asses out of the Middle East and let Israel deal with it without us!
Ah, yas! Back by popular demand the case of the missing 63 or how 63 + 63 became 63.
I first spotted this anomaly while studying AR-5 back in 2014. Was in Overland Park on a contract with a major EPC w time on my hands. Spent a couple of frustrating weeks trying to make these numbers work and I finally had to admit there were two 63s but only one shown on the graphic. The summer interns who made it did not understand the numbers, just arranged them as directed.
Now for our discussing pleasure:
GOZINTAZ positive, GOZOUTAZ negative.
TFK_bams09
160 arrives, per LoT 1 160 is all that can leave.
+160 surface – 80 latent – 17 sensible – 1st 63 but AWOL – 396 BB + 333 back – 2nd 63 LWIR = – 63 AWOL
Solar 63 goes missing
Does not balance.
Both 63s reach OLR
+160 surface – 80 latent – 17 sensible – 1st 63 LWIR – 396 BB + 333 back – 2nd 63 LWIR = – 126
Does not balance.
1st 63 to OLR, 2nd 63 goes nowhere.
+160 surface – 80 latent – 17 sensible – 1st 63 LWIR – 396 BB + 333 back + 2nd 63 LWIR = 0
Balances.
1st 63 reaches OLR at ToA.
80/17/63 really from sun
2nd 63 must return to surface.
396/333/63 imaginary
Schroder, you are so lacking in heat transfer skill….at ground level….your red arrows…398-342=56 is Net heat radiated from the ground to the sky. Then absorbed solar is 161…and 56 radiant+84 latent+20 thermals equals the absorbed sunlight of 161. It BALANCES.
Followed by your claims of a mysterious second 63 (I think you mean 56 on this cartoon, but I digress)…this is called “conservation of energy” on the next layer up.
You don’t seem to understand that, say, your face radiates say 480 W/m^2 to its surroundings…but if the surrounds are 30 C there is no Net radiation to your face. Your face is receiving back from the surroundings the same amount of electromagnetic radiation as it is emitting. Your metabolism does not need to produce 480 w/m^2 of energy…but it will start sweating to get rid of say half of its usual total 100 watts or so of exces heat….by sweating…
And I will add… EMR only becomes HEAT if it is absorbed by something. Technically the 398 needs to be absorbed by a something at absolute zero, like outer space, before it will all be all converted to HEAT. When radiating to something around freezing temp like cloud bottoms, there will be the 342 EMR coming back from surroundings…so the HEAT leaving the surface is only 56. You should have learned this in engineering school in the 70’s….
398 is an imaginary calculation.
Well no, that’s pretty much exactly the amount of EMR that a 16 C surface with an emissivity close to 1.0….emits…
1.0 emissivity is impossible!!!!
“When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science.”
Lord Kelvin
Numbers.
Solar luminosity 3.828E+26 W
Solar diameter 1.39E+09 m
Solar spherical area 6.09E+18 m^2
Solar power flux 6.28E+07 W/m^2
S-B BB temperature 5,769.40 K (Yes, 6! Significant figures!!)
Earth average orbital radius 1.496E+11 m
Earth orbital spherical area 2.812E+23 m^2
Solar discular power flux 1,361.13 W/m^2 (+/- 45)
S-B BB temperature 393.62 K
Discular to spherical / 4 340.28 W/m^2
Net 30% albedo 238.20 W/m^2 (+/- 11)
Net atmos absorb 79 159.20 W/m^2
Net/net arriving at surface 159.20 W/m^2
Leaving per LoT 1 159.20 W/m^2
Kinetic sensible 17.00 W/m^2
Kinetic latent 80.00 W/m^2
LWIR by remainder 62.20 W/m^2
Balanced 0.0
All the energy musical chairs are filled.
Imaginary. upwelling/back/duplicate.
Imaginary. S-B calc for 1.5 m surface at 16 C 396 W/m^2
Imaginary. Emissivity. 63/396=0.16
Imaginary. “Back” 333 W/m^2
Imaginary, “extra”, duplicate. 63 W/m^2
396 BB/333 “back”/63 duplicate implode to a big fat ZERO!
GHE = bogus & CAGW = scam.
Hmmm, seems I need to spend my half cup of morning coffee on Shroeder nonsense again. Let’s see…
Solar luminosity…yes you have the numbers reasonably correct.
Next para…oops the 79159.20 number is wrong….the 159.20 is the number entering the soil/water….not net arriving…
Next para….wow…entirely correct…Balanced…musical chairs filled…I’m proud of your work on this para Nick.
Now the last para…assume 1.5 is a typo for 1.0…16C=396 watts…OK…but this is EMR and isn’t HEAT unless absorbed by a surface at -273 C…and since the mosaic of cloud bottoms, outer space, water vapor and CO2 is emitting 333 of EMR as a result of it’s own temperature (around freezing)….the net radiation heat leaving the surface is 396-333=63 …definitely NOT imaginary…proven by thousands of measurements from Maxwell, Planck, and even your IR thermometer….So the big fat zero you mention is the mark on your heat transfer exam…
Labour will be in control of the UK at least until August of 2029. Their plan for the next three years is to accelerate the pace of the UK’s transition to a Net Zero marxist-style economy so that by the summer of 2029, it will be near impossible for the UK to recover from their forced economic and energy transformation.
Here is an immigration policy question for Americans.
After 2030, should we be open to allowing a mass migration into the United States of UK citizens who are claiming persecution from their government, with a fast track to US citizenship for those who decide to abandon their lives in the UK for a better life in the former American colonies?
Dear B-B.,
To your question, the short answer is Y-E-S.
(Cf. the special policy now admitting asylees persecuted in the R.S.A.)
But don’t wait beyond January of ’29 …
And this: the most secure migration route may be via Maritime Canada; then work westward to Alberta (or eastern B.C.), crossing therefrom into Idaho (or western Montana / eastern WA), then generally southeastward down the Intermountain-West States toward whatever is your (their) destination / gathering point.
Best of Luck to You All, — R.L.W.
In this thread someone asked good ol’ Grok about the emissivity of CO2. Here’s its answer:
If this is what Grok answered, and my experience with AI suggests it could be easily, all this really does is point out the Achilles heel of AI — it can’t think and it can’t calculate.
First to even speak of “emissivity” for a gaseous substance requires an understanding of what “emissivity” means and how that concept could apply to a gaseous substance as opposed to condensed matter. Ignoring collisions between molecules, gaseous substances absorb and emit radiation in lines which are occasionally so densely spaced that people refer to them as “radiation bands”. Emissivity is merely a proportionality between what a substance emits at a particular condition compared to how a true black body would emit under the same conditions. It is a very low-order approximation for non-black body behavior.
Nonetheless, all one has to do to see the error of Grok’s explanation is to go to an actual textbook about engineering heat transfer, (you know, something built from actual thinking and measurement) and find a graph depicting the “emissivity equivalent” for CO2 in a mix of non-radiating gasses. Every textbook on the subject has such a graph. Nowhere on that graph does the equivalent emissivity of CO2 drop to a level anywhere near 0.001. In fact, the emissivity is actually rising as temperature drops below 300K. For the lower 2km of the atmosphere, at 400ppm CO2, that graph based on engineering measurements, shows that the emissivity of CO2 is near 0.2.
Beware AI.
Emissivity is a property of condensed matter. The concept of emissivity of a gas consisting of individual atoms and molecules is meaningless.
https://www.physics.rutgers.edu/~matilsky/documents/kirchoff.html
In detail you may have a point, but engineers employ the concept of “effective emissivity” of the atmosphere within an oven, furnace, boiler all the time, or at least whenever what they are interested in is the bulk heat transfer from combustion gasses to the enclosure. Thus to speak of ratio (emissivity) of emitted power of an atmosphere of various gasses to that which a black body would do at the same temperature makes perfectly good engineering sense.
If what you say were rigorously true (i.e. emissivity is meaningless) why would advanced engineering textbooks have the graph of emissivity as a function of temperature and pressure-path length?
There were probably PT graphs for caloric.
There are two definitions for emissivity.
The first is the ratio between radiation leaving a system and all the energy leaving the system, i.e. including the kinetic modes. (conduction, convection, advection (wind), latent (evap & cond)) Use this one for actual mass & energy calculations. For example: TFK_bams09 = 63/160=0.40
The second is the ratio between radiation leaving the system and the energy leaving were the system a BB at its temperature. For example: TFK_bams09 at 16 C = 63/396=0.16. This is used for correcting IR instruments. IR instruments are calibrated assuming the target is a BB. If it is not the operator is advised to spoof one with black paint or tape or a known value. Imaginary & not useful for thermal calculations.
BTW I have an experiment that demonstrates this. (Feynman)
Because of the significant (60% per TFK_bams09) non-radiative, i.e. kinetic, heat transfer processes of the contiguous participating atmospheric molecules the surface cannot upwell “extra” energy as a near Black Body.
As demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science.
For the experimental write up see:
https://principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/
Search: Bruges group “boiling water pot” Schroeder
IMO radiation requires a defined surface. Gases don’t qualify. IR goes right through without attenuation. Stand before an IR heater. Planck’s work suggests that IR wave lengths are too long to interact at the molecular level.
High energy short waves, e.g. X-rays, shred molecules.
It’s a consensus seeking literature agglomerator with some copyright anti-infringement software piled on. Unfortunately so much incorrect stuff is written about the emissivity of CO2 that Grok’s algorithms have difficulty. Yes, Beware AI…
Emissivity is much like entropy, tossed around to impress yet clueless as to details.
Question on windmills. In 2021, a friend and I took a vacation driving across north Texas from Texarkana in the Northeast through the panhandle to New Mexico and Colorado. In some places it seemed there were windmills as far as the eye could see. Last year we drove the same route. There didn’t seem to be as many as in 2021. Are they starting to take them down or not replacing them as they tear up? Or just a faulty memory?
Power out for 20 hrs and counting. Hot. Hell of a holiday. Fourth outage over last month. Grid sick.
Where is your location-just curious.
Not David W. but:
Gemini says multiple states have downed power lines due to weather in Midwest & Northeast: MI, NJ, PA, NY & CN. Total of several hundred thousand households affected.
IIRC PJM was predicted to be one of the most fragile grids this year.
MO has some major outages too, and I heard that the PJM was-um-fragile. It worries me as I’m on a co-op power outfit that just got bought by a subsidy farming electricity outfit in AR. We’ve been told to expect 20% increases in cost for, you know, upgrades, etc. I understand why that insurance CEO got popped. I don’t agree with it, but I understand the anger.
Just you wait. Governor Spanberger, a former CIA spook, will blame the outages on PJM’s failure to connect more cheap and plentiful wind and solar generation to the mid-Atlantic’s regional power grid.
Another attempt to blame productivity-enhancing chemicals for bad things:
Fact File: Does banning glyphosate prevent wildfires? Here’s what we know – Victoria Times Colonist
The claim is that a bad wildfire season in Quebec resulted from use of glyphosate, which kills broad-leaf plants.
But Quebec does not use glyphosate.
(It is used by a few provinces to kill species that compete with conifers early in regrowth of forests.)
The 2023 wildfire season in Québec: an overview of extreme conditions, impacts, lessons learned, and considerations for the future – ScienceDirect identifies warmer than usual conditions as the immediate cause.
I recall that Quebec’s wildfire experience is better than other provinces because it is aggressive in jumping on fires early. That requires resources on ground and in air. It has its own fleet of ‘Canadairs’ – the scoopers that it leases a few of to California each year, publicized in a recent bad season near Los Angeles.
The paper also notes a problem I keep harping on – depending on other provinces and the US may not work when they have a bad season. In 2023 Quebec contracted with resources from ‘international’ sources, Mexico is often a source of labour.
BC is cheap IMJ without enough large tankers, it rejects a company based in BC that coverts C-130s, B-737s, and large helicopters then contracts them in the US, Australia, and South America.
The paper tries to blame Quebec’s bad 2023 season of wildfires on climate warming, claiming increasing frequency of bad seasons going back to 1847 and perhaps earlier (one paragraph bring the LIA in, but is difficult to understand).
A key factor in 2023 was drier than normal conditions resulting from an Atlantic area weather phenomenon. The paper claims increasing incidence of drought but I have not digested the reasoning.
(Adding to main post: dead vegetation increases heat of fire thus ultimately spread of fire. But the claim FAILs fundamentally.)
One must remember that the boreal forest has existed for several thousand years, expanding their carbon sequestration as glaciers retreated… but the mature trees are only a century and a bit old. Everywhere has burned before, likely several times per millennium. And all the fires were “wild”.
Tough corals:
The Corals That Shouldn’t Exist – bioGraphic
And ugly putrid birds: Turkey vulture population grows as temperatures warm – Victoria Times Colonist.
(With obligatory claim about climate warming and pesticides (I assume egg-shell thinning fallacy – problem existed before DDT was in common use).)
Blocking nature’s progression: US to Create Endangered Species Genomic and Cellular Biovault – Human Progress
A common scam of eco-activists is talking as though they speak for everyone:
“Today’s announcement asks us to trade this legacy without accounting for what we might have to give up in return,” said Misty MacDuffee, director of the wild salmon program for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation.”
(That’s the outfit that pointed to the Tongass preserve in Alaska as evidence that cougars decimate deer populations – equating Vancouver Island to it. But there are no cougars there, the main predator is wolves.)
Tacked onto the end of an article reporting that tribe whose reservation a new pipeline would cross, the tribe is simply asking for details of the proposal.
First Nations want consultations on $44-billion oil pipeline for BC | Vancouver Sun
Good news bad news for fossil fuel use in SW BC.
The City of Vancouver BC is eliminating its prohibition against use of natural gas in new buildings.
But the city of Victoria BC continues to offer property tax relief to owners of apartment buildings who convert from natural gas for space and water heating to electricity. They’ve had very few takers. (Electricity prices in BC are relatively low because of hydroelectric generation.) I presume distribution of heat is by registers using hot water.
Natural gas has only been available on Vancouver Island for a few decades, so I presume the buildings originally used fuel oil fired boilers. (They look too new to have had coal fuel.) In contrast, the mainland has had natural gas since the 1950s, with spurs into the western US. (It comes from NE BC.)