[–] whateverman223 ago  (edited ago)

Why does your diagram have 240 W/m^2 coming from the sun while your comment mentions 960 W/m^2 (88°c) coming from the sun?

Seems to me like you don't even understand your own post and are some sort of disinformation/flat earth/troll campaign.

[–] Boomie [S] ago 

Read it again.

[–] Boomie [S] ago 

This climate model.


Under the auspice of conservation of energy, climate alarmist have created this model.

What that model actually represents is a flat earth under a frozen sun.


They have taken the suns energy and divided it by 4 and spread it over the entire surface area of the earth at once. Making it a useless model with no basis in reality whatsoever.

When the sun actually hits one hemisphere at a time and has a focal point of energy where the sunlight is most intense.

That would be like cooking a turkey at 1/4 the temperature for 4x as long and expecting the same results, ridiculous.

This is what the model should look like, if you want to draw any conclusions that will actually play out in reality.


Basically they've removed the ability for the sun to create the climate, which is what actually happens, and concocted this pseudo science were the earth's climate creates itself. The earth somehow gets hotter(has more energy) than the heat(energy) provided. If that were the case actual greenhouses would also demonstrate this runaway heating feedback loop. A greenhouse can not have more energy than the sun provides. This is taught in every college, complete junk science.

They stole the name green house because what happens in a green house has nothing to do with their made up greenhouse effect. (check out bonus vid at the bottom)

If you want to understand more watch this. It's Canadian astrophysicists Joseph Postma explaining that there is no such thing as a radiative greenhouse effect.


Also Watch Dr. Willie Soon to learn more about the IPCC and the fake political science that has infested the field.


Carbon is one of the 3 main ingredients for life. When there is more C02 in the air life is more abundant and stronger. We breath it out with every breath.

Their climate GHE should be able to be experimentally confirmed in real greenhouses, but it isn’t. This is an empirical disproof. 2) Their climate GHE necessitates recycling and reverse flow of heat, which is of course a violation of theory. Hence it is theoretically invalid which goes with the empirical disproof. 3) The origin of their climate GHE is in their flat Earth models where the Sun cannot create the climate, and thus their GHE is then postulated to make up for what their flat Earth cold sunshine cannot do in such a model. In reality of course the Sun does do it all, but their empirically invalid starting point for deriving their GHE explains why they then run into the theoretical problems as above which of course has its own lack of empirical support.

Answer this, in a actual green house being hit by 960 W/m^2 (88°c) will the inside of the green house exceed 88°c?

Answer= NO

An ice cube emits 240wm^2, boiling water emits over 1000wm^2.

If you add the 240wm^2 ice to boiling water, what happens to the energy of the water?

Does it get hotter or colder?

According to that model the water would get hotter! Do not confuse energy and heat!

How an actual greenhouse works.


Postma's debunk of Skeptical Science


A Breakdown I made to help people who can't understand the alarmist model.


Where do Climate Alarmist Numbers Come From?


Postma goes through some peer review by the American Meteorological Society.




[–] Boomie [S] ago 

Here is more relevant info that commonly comes up in my rebuttals to alarmist.

Their model has no basis in reality.

The earth's atmosphere doesn't operate like a green house at all.

A green house traps warm air. That's it. It prevents the hot air from rising and cooling.

"Answer this, in a actual green house being hit by 960 W/m^2 (88°c) will the inside of the green house exceed 88°c?

Answer= NO"

The absolute maximum the temp inside the greenhouse could be is 88C

There is no reason why that model should not be applicable to real green houses.

If the model WERE correct, the inside of the green house would generate ANOTHER 960w/m^2.

which gets added to the suns 960w/m^2.

The earth's atmosphere limits the temperature spectrum on earth.

If the earth had no atmosphere, it would be like the moon, extremely hot on one side, extremely cold on the other. The temperature spectrum is very wide.

On Earth the atmosphere blocks a portion of the suns energy, dispersing it.

Preventing us from feeling the full force of the sun.

Imagine if the earth had a at least 100ft deep ocean across it’s whole surface, and no atmosphere.

Take the temperature of the sea floor of the side of the earth facing the sun, and the temperature on the sea floor on the opposite night side. Same distance underwater of course. These two temperatures will be quite close together.

Now remove all the ocean and do the same temperature measurements again, the temperatures will be on completely opposite sides of the spectrum.

The atmosphere has substance, mainly water vapor. It retains and transfers heat from the sunny side, to the night side.

The same thing happens in places with very little water. I'm sure you've heard how deserts can be below freezing at night, and blisteringly hot during the day. Because there is little substance(water) to propagate heat flow.

Conductive heat transfer Q = k* (Thot – Tcool)

Huh look at that heat flow from hot to cool. Now we should find something remarkably different for radiation, as per their claims. Let’s see:

Radiative heat transfer: Q = s*(Thot4 – Tcool4).

Also from hot to cold.


Climate science and its greenhouse effect ARE flat Earth theory.

Heat flow is one way, and the cooler atmosphere does not heat the warmer surface.

The Sun heats the Earth, not the atmosphere at twice the power of the Sun.

Refer to the AMS video. And don’t forget these textbook quotes:

“Heat is defined as any spontaneous flow of energy from one object to another caused by a difference in temperature between the objects. We say that “heat” flows from a warm radiator into a cold room, from hot water into a cold ice cube, and from the hot Sun to the cool Earth. The mechanism may be different in each case, but in each of these processes the energy transferred is called “heat”.” – Thermal Physics [2](pg. 18)“If a physical process increases the total entropy of the universe, that process cannot happen in reverse since this would violate the second law of thermodynamics. Processes that create new entropy are therefore said to be irreversible. […]“Perhaps the most important type of thermodynamic process is the flow of heat from a hot object to a cold one. We saw […] that this process occurs because the total multiplicity of the combined system thereby increases; hence the total entropy increases also, and heat flow is always irreversible. […]“Most of the process we observe in life involve large entropy increases are therefore highly irreversible: sunlight warming the Earth […].” – Thermal Physics [2](pg. 82)

“Heat is defined as the form of energy that is transferred across a boundary by virtue of a temperature difference or temperature gradient. Implied in this definition is the very important fact that a body never contains heat, but that heat is identified as heat only as it crosses the boundary. Thus, heat is a transient phenomenon. If we consider the hot block of copper as a system and the cold water in the beaker as another system, we recognize that originally neither system contains any heat (they do contain energy, of course.) When the copper is placed in the water and the two are in thermal communication, heat is transferred from the copper to the water, until equilibrium of temperature is established. At that point we no longer have heat transfer, since there is no temperature difference. Neither of the systems contains any heat at the conclusion of the process. It also follows that heat is identified at the boundaries of the system, for heat is defined as energy being transferred across the system boundary.” – Thermodynamics [3]

“The temperature of a body alone is what determines whether heat will be transferred from it to another body with which it is in contact or vice versa. A large block of ice at 00C has far more internal energy than a cup of hot water; yet when the water is poured on the ice some of the ice melts and the water becomes cooler, which signifies that energy has passed from the water to the ice.“When the temperature of a body increases, it is customary to say that heat has been added to it; when the temperature decreases, it is customary to say that heat has been removed from it. When no work is done, ΔU = Q, which says that the internal energy change of the body is equal to the heat transferred to it from the surroundings. One definition of heat is:Heat is energy transferred across the boundary of a system as a result of a temperature difference only.” – Classical and Statistical Thermodynamics [4]

“How and why does heat energy flow? In other words, we need an expression for the dependence of the flow of heat energy on the temperature field. First we summarize certain qualitative properties of heat flow with which we are all familiar:

If the temperature is constant in a region, no heat energy flows.

If there are temperature differences, the heat energy flows from the hotter region to the colder region.[…]” – Elementary Applied Partial Differential Equations [5]

All of this describes what is occurring with the thermodynamic states of the system and heat flow. And heat flow is summarized in those equations. One way only.

The second law of thermodynamics.


-Joseph E Postma