Copied from PSI

Al Shelton
# Al Shelton 2014-12-31 06:29

Water changes to water vapor at constant T. [Heat of Vaporization]. The water vapor expands and rise [Hydrological cycle].
Why is it that CO2 cannot absorb heat, expand, and rise with no increase in T???
The GHG Theorists keep telling me that CO2 [a gas], acts like a solid [blanket] and “trap” heat.
I t makes no sense in an open system like planet earth’s atmosphere. IMO
Somebody please explain if and why I am wrong/

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

solvingtornadoes
# solvingtornadoes 2014-12-31 12:53

Quoting Al Shelton:

Water changes to water vapor at constant T. [Heat of Vaporization]. The water vapor expands and rise [Hydrological cycle].
Why is it that CO2 cannot absorb heat, expand, and rise with no increase in T???
The GHG Theorists keep telling me that CO2 [a gas], acts like a solid [blanket] and “trap” heat.
I t makes no sense in an open system like planet earth’s atmosphere. IMO
Somebody please explain if and why I am wrong/

Hi Al,
I’m not sure if I fully understand your question but it does seem that part of the answer has to do with you being one of the many victims of the H2O convection myth. This myth pivots off an other myth, that being this notion that there is steam in earth’s atmosphere. Above its boiling point temperature H2O is a gas. And some people refer to this (steam) as water vapor. But below it’s boiling point the H2O that is mixed in with air is not a gas. It is still a liquid. (The droplets/clusters are often too small to be visible.) And some people also call this water vapor. So, I avoid using the phrase “water vapor” because it’s ambiguous. Instead I refer to steam or to moist air.

So here’s the thing, if there is no steam in earth’s atmosphere a parcel of moist air will only contain droplets/clusters of H2O and the parcel will, as a result, be heavier, not lighter, than dry air. Thus if we are to explain how/why H2O gets up high in our atmosphere we have to find some mechanism other than buoyancy/convection, as I have done in the first chapter of my latest book:
wp.me/p4JijN-aE

Being extremely well mixed in with all other gases, there is no reason CO2 cannot/would not do as you suggest, IMO.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

solvingtornadoes
# solvingtornadoes 2014-12-31 12:53

Quoting Al Shelton:

Water changes to water vapor at constant T. [Heat of Vaporization]. The water vapor expands and rise [Hydrological cycle].
Why is it that CO2 cannot absorb heat, expand, and rise with no increase in T???
The GHG Theorists keep telling me that CO2 [a gas], acts like a solid [blanket] and “trap” heat.
I t makes no sense in an open system like planet earth’s atmosphere. IMO
Somebody please explain if and why I am wrong/

Hi Al,
I’m not sure if I fully understand your question but it does seem that part of the answer has to do with you being one of the many victims of the H2O convection myth. This myth pivots off an other myth, that being this notion that there is steam in earth’s atmosphere. Above its boiling point temperature H2O is a gas. And some people refer to this (steam) as water vapor. But below it’s boiling point the H2O that is mixed in with air is not a gas. It is still a liquid. (The droplets/clusters are often too small to be visible.) And some people also call this water vapor. So, I avoid using the phrase “water vapor” because it’s ambiguous. Instead I refer to steam or to moist air.

So here’s the thing, if there is no steam in earth’s atmosphere a parcel of moist air will only contain droplets/clusters of H2O and the parcel will, as a result, be heavier, not lighter, than dry air. Thus if we are to explain how/why H2O gets up high in our atmosphere we have to find some mechanism other than buoyancy/convection, as I have done in the first chapter of my latest book:
wp.me/p4JijN-aE

Being extremely well mixed in with all other gases, there is no reason CO2 cannot/would not do as you suggest, IMO.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Al Shelton
# Al Shelton 2014-12-31 14:53

Thanks for that. I will study this further.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Al Shelton
# Al Shelton 2014-12-31 14:53

Thanks for that. I will study this further.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

solvingtornadoes
# solvingtornadoes 2015-01-05 11:51

Quoting Al Shelton:

Thanks for that. I will study this further.

You are not understanding the nature of the problem. You can’t study if further because there isn’t anything for you to study. Ultimately it comes down to dollars and sense. Meteorologists won’t test the notion and are determined to ignore anybody that does because their conceptualization of storms (and how water gets up high in the atmosphere) is 100% dependent on the believe that parcels of moist air are lighter than parcels of dry air. So there is no political will to test the notion and/or pay attention to anybody that did test the notion. And they are determined to ignore anything (this for example: wp.me/p4JijN-6R ) that disputes what they want to believe. (Just like CO2 Forcing in climatology.)

I’ll give you a perfect example of the power of consensus on this issue. You yourself, about 2 or 3 months ago, had the same conversation that we had recently and it ended the same way, with you saying you’d look into it. What was the result of that? The result is that you capitulated to consensus. You reverted back to believing in cold steam.

Let’s be honest Al. You won’t study this further. There really isn’t anything for you to study anyway. And a few months from now after you have again capitulated to the consensus and you will once again say that you are going to study something that you won’t.

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

solvingtornadoes
# solvingtornadoes 2015-01-05 12:35

For more evidence of how complete irrational is this belief in cold steam, follow this link. (At the bottom of each comment there is a thread that can be expanded by clicking.):

www.quora.com/Would-anybody-like-to-attempt-to-substantiate-this-claim-regarding-weight-of-moist-air-Please-show-your-calculations#

Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: