![Electric cars [500x500 - 314KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/LWSiRl.png){kind=link}
This runs afoul of basic thermodynamics.
So when you sit in a car parked in the sun with all the windows up it doesn't get hotter because that would run afoul of basic thermodynamics. Got it.
So when you sit in a car parked in the sun with all the windows up it doesn't get hotter because that would run afoul of basic thermodynamics.
That also isn't a closed system, because your car ('the system' in your case) interacts with its environment, both losing heat to, and gaining heat from. I was curious if you would catch your error, but you didn't: closed systems don't have equilibrium temperatures; by definition adiabatic systems are considered as if all losses and gains to the environment are negligible, and so are ignored.
The atmosphere and related aren't closed systems on any scale; this breaks the assumption you needed to suggest there was a causal link between H20 and CO2.
That also isn't a closed system, because your car ('the system' in your case) interacts with its environment,
And yet it gets hotter inside than outside. Hmmm. I wonder what's preventing it from equalizing with external conditions if it's an open system.
The atmosphere and related aren't closed systems on any scale
If you want to be pedantic nothing is a closed system, not even black holes. See Hawking Radiation.
this breaks the assumption you needed to suggest there was a causal link between H20 and CO2.
It breaks nothing. You still haven't explained how CO2 can absorb infrared radiation without warming. That's an interesting hypothesis for someone so concerned with thermodynamics. Where does the energy go?
This is the problem with arguing with laymen. You use words without knowing their definitions, and then your incorrect definitions actually mire you.
I just gave you the definition of a closed system; it isn't my own definition - use Wikipedia if you wish - but you need to understand these concepts if you want to have a meaningful conversation on thermodynamics, and this is true for any discipline, from the sciences to the trades.
And yet it gets hotter inside than outside. Hmmm. I wonder what's preventing it from equalizing with external conditions if it's an open system.
Your air conditiioner, which thermodynamically is a heat pump. If you turn your AC off, it *will* equalize out.
Jesus Christ man.
If you want to be pedantic nothing is a closed system, not even black holes
This is correct, and the proper way to reason about real-world systems. Further; it isn't pedantism; I explained closed systems can only be used when the interactions of a system and it's environment can be ignored. In real life, everything interacts with it's environment (which I have been telling you since the beginning).
It breaks nothing.
Then how does the link still exist? You rebutted me when I said there was no causal link, and you claimed that 1. adding CO2 increases equilibrium temp (which is wrong), and 2. that higher temps equal more atmospheric water (which is wrong, and also circular [thus not-even-wrong]).
You still haven't explained how CO2 can absorb infrared radiation without warming.
I never claimed this, nor was this ever a part of my argument.
My argument, which I backed up with citations, is: any effect from CO2 would be OVERSHADOWED BY AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE by H2O'S effect. Thus, it LITERALLY DOESN'T MATTER what happens to atmospheric CO2, since all so-called 'warming' effects are driven by water.
(post is archived)