The Greenhouse Gas Demo

This is SO FAKE!
https://principia-scientific.org/john-tyndalls-experiment-not-prove-greenhouse-gas-effect/
and this is REAL:
https://www.climatedepot.com/2015/09/02/a-new-record-pause-length-satellite-data-no-global-warming-for-18-years-8-months/
https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/ideal-gas-law-and-the-greenhouse-effect-2157-7617-1000468-101034.html

You should also record the ppm difference in CO2 and plot that against temperature as well. It may be that if u raise from 280ppm to 500ppm the temperature increase is miniscule. You should also select a bulb with same spectral distribution as the sun and same intensity as the sun.

This is much more in percent compared to our atmosphere co2 concentration.

So doing the calculations, the temperature rose 44 – 35°C = 9°C. That is 9°C from 400 ppm to 1,000,000 ppm. That means 10 ppm change produces a 9/(1,000,000-400) = 0.000009°C difference. That’s insignificant.

Let’s put it another way. In order to increase the temperature by 1°C, you need to increase carbon dioxide by 1/9 or to 100,000 ppm from 400 ppm.

When you convert a liquid to gas, do you not absorb heat? Is this not the very manner in which air conditioning operates?

So this is why when I take Alka-Seltzer I feel hot.

Here is the original experiment description from NOAA: http://web.archive.org/web/20060129154229/http:/www.srh.noaa.gov/srh/jetstream/atmos/ll_gas.htm It was removed from the website in 2015 because it does not demonstrate the greenhouse effect on earth. A heat lamp bulb emits radiation at a temperature of 2500K-3000K while the earth's surface emits at a temperature of around 300K – completely different spectra of radiation. CO2's contribution to the greenhouse effect is wavelengths near 15um; this is near the peak of radiation emitted by the earth's surface. A heat lamp bulb emits radiation at much shorter wavelengths. The experiment shows that CO2 absorbs radiation, but it's the wrong radiation for the greenhouse effect.

Co2 is being produced by those pills right, i wonder what that does to the temperature.

The earth atmosphere is not concealed to a fixed the volume, the atmosphere expands outward as there are more gas molecules filling the space.

What's interesting about this demonstration, is the belief that we need to conduct and experiment on atmospheric science in a lab. In actuality, climate scientists have collected cause and effect data on greenhouse gasses (GHG) now for the past six decades, in some cases down to the minute by minute level. Amazing stuff.

Anyone can access and use that data to prove actual cause and effect. Does CO2 force T (global temperature) or does T force CO2? The answer is in those datasets. I've tested them all (took a year) and all show the same thing. No need to rely on ice core proxy samples any more. We have real-time measurements. If climate scientists took the time to look, they would find some interesting stuff that explains the 100K-yr climate cycles:
1) Changes in methane forces temperature short-term and long-term.
2) A given change in water vapor forces temperature more in places that have ample ground water and less in places that are arid.
3) CO2 forces temperatures more in places that are void of flora and less in places with more flora.
4) GHG explains about 10% of climate change.
5) CO2-GHG, globally (given global levels of flora), forces temperatures for two weeks (strongly I might add).
6) CO2-Greening (the impact CO2 has on flora to increase photosynthesis and leaf mass) takes about two weeks to detect.
7) In four weeks, CO2-GHG + CO2-Greening has a net negative effect on climate change and works against H20 and CH4.
8) The combined CO2 negative forcing effect (CO2-GHG + CO2-Greening), strengthens to a peak level in 8 months but is still clear after a year.

So to summarize, H20, CH4, and CO2 all force climate given today's level of flora. But the total forcing effect of CO2 only lasts for about 2 weeks. After four weeks, CO2 is cooling the earth because of its stimulus to flora.

Those findings are found in the following international real-time datasets: NASA, NOAA, WMO (Tokyo), Mauna Loa (Hawaii), Berkeley, Spencer Satellite, RSS, United Kingdom (Hadley), Cowtan/Way, South Pole, Barrow Alaska and others. And while many scientists are happy with 95% confidence (a 5% chance of being wrong), the climate datasets are so awesome (low noise) and large (sample size), that the results have less than a one in ten thousand chance of being wrong.

CO2 is more than a green house gas.

Earth – CO2 (in Earth´s atmosphere) = 40°C at noon
Moon – no CO2 no atmosphere – 130°C at noon.

Therefore, the bottle with CO2 is always colder.
Try it without the water and with the same pressure in the bottles.
The bottle with CO2 will always be colder.

Can everyone in the comments calm down i am literally taking this experiment in the 7th grade meaning this is for children for a example it doesn't have to be logical and you guys are acting like legitamle scientects in the comments ;-;

It is now absolute that CO2 has NO EFFECT ON EARTH'S MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE. It’s really quite simple. CO2 at altitude 90 – 100 km is emitting at -80° C, 15μm spectrum toward the surface which is 15° C. The energy levels of the surface equivalent to -80° C are full and the downward IR is reflected upwards. It is simply impossible for a cold body to heat a warmer body. We are done. No effect. Fantasy to think otherwise.

Thank you soooooooooooooooo much! Please keep this demo out there. I can use this demo to teach some friends.