Added: 3 years ago
From: M4GW
Views: 7,451
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (72)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Are you sure you didn't get the bags mixed up? I've never heard that CO2 causes cooling!??!

  • IF you would have spent another $30 million you would have been able to show the bag with the car exhaust was 0.1 degrees hotter than the bag with the air!!! /sarc

  • He proved it! all you hippies on here talking about variables and frames lol. just drop it, global warming is a bs theorie created by green peace to get people to stop making fun of them and listen. some people did listen but those of us who are smarter than a bag of drier lint know better.

  • The thermometers are wrapped in the plastic, so that is what they are measuring, not the temperature of the air in the bags. He needed a support frame of some sort to keep the plastic from directly contacting the thermometers. Then this experiment would should the expected result.

  • Some other variables are: a) that the exhaust was rich in water from combustion (could have a temperature moderating or lowering effect, especially because the water would be in liquid form (from condensing after coming out of the car at high temp and cooling at low temp)) b) there may be unburned fuel in the exhaust which has some effect c)the exhaust has dusty particulates which could reflect sunlight while the other bag did not d) what other people said. I still appreciate the experiment.

  • Its a good idea, but you have too many confounding variables doing it like that (wind, volume of air/exhaust in the bag, the seal around the stick, etc). If you wanted to try something similar, you could copy this kid's version ( /watch?v=q0kIaCKPlH4 ) but substitute exhaust for the CO2. Just make sure you keep it out of the wind etc :-)

  • *facepalm*

  • That can't possibly be right because it contradicts established scientific dogma!!!!

  • It's nice to see the real scientific spirit is alive. I mean that seriously.

    It would seem that the bag itself would act as a greenhouse. Past that my grade school science isn't capable of explaining. It would be interesting to ask a real physicist.

  • Now thats what I call bullshit...I mean science.

  • you need to test both thermometers without bags to see if they record the same temperatures.

  • @comtbike or switch which thermometer has air and which has truck exhaust. Hard to say anything at all about the results until that's done. It'd also be good to know exactly what's in the exhaust (and the air for that matter).

  • @Lamboragon Haha. Thanks. Yeah. I laugh because global warming alarmists got tired of rallies with recorded cold days so they slowly started changing the name to global crisis - that will cover ALL their bases! haha.

  • @Lamboragon Ok - fine. I will start worrying when respected scientists start crying about it (with no financial or political connections) NOT politicians. It is a fraud. Al Gore refuses to debate because he is both a fraud AND an idiot. He picks and chooses facts, photos, images, videos to further his objective. Libs have always looked for fake crisis's.  70's global cooling, 80's acid rain, 90's ozone layer, 2000's global warming - an now climate crisis (to cover all bases!)

  • @kagosage That's because moist air makes sweating less effective.

  • @Lamboragon Great Point Lamboragon! Cars don't damage the enviorment! At least not like Al Gore would have you believe.

  • The wind is blowing heat from the car exaust bag to the atmospheric bag. The only greenhouse effect is caused by the plastic bags. I don't see how this proves that car exhaust is a worse greenhouse gas than air.

  • I think you need to do it on a less windy day and make sure the bags are fully sealed.

  • And you think this is a proof? While one can applaud your amateurish enthusiasm, it is simply one simple experiment with a fairly large number of methodological flaws.

    However as your conclusion seems to go against 200 years of accumulated knowledge of physics, i think you might need a bit more repetition and replication by others to declare "proof."

  • @rugbyguy59 200 years? Wow, that's a lot. Well, not really, if you compare it to the 4.5 BILLION years the Earth has been around. Golly, the polar bears! Oh noes! Wait, wasn't it mother nature herself who sent the hunk of rock hurtling to earth all those hundreds of millions of years ago that wiped out the dinosaurs and more than half of all life on earth? Not to mention that while the average household produces 53 tons of CO2 each year, blue whales and other mammals produce up to 87 tons indiv.

  • @LordVaderVader 200 years of scientific knowledge. What's your point?

    Asteroids have caused mass extinctions but so have natural global warming events. Of course this time we are doing it to ourselves.

    Get an education please. Breathing...blue whales, humans, whatever... is all part of the natural carbon cycle. It has nothing to do with CO2 increases. The recent increase in CO2 concentration comes from burning fossil fuels. That is increasing the greenhouse effect and waring the planet.

  • @rugbyguy59 My point of 200 years is that in the Earth's history, 200 years is less than the blink of an eye. There are numerous proofs showing that AGW is bogus, and I've personally never heard of global warming causing mass extinction. And I have an education, enough of one to know how to separate fact from governmental money-making scams.

  • @LordVaderVader But 200 years for a scientific theory to not only hold up but be strengthened is an enormous period of time. Global warming causes the oceans to deoxidize. When there is less oxygen then bacteria that produce hydrogen sulphide take over and when hydrogen sulphide concentrations increase massive extinctions occur. This happened 250 MYA for one.

    And what great proofs are there. I've examined them all and checked them out. I've yet to meet one that holds up to examination.

  • @rugbyguy59 *sigh* Whatever. I've made my point, and I remain unconvinced just as you do. Sorry for the trouble, and have a nice day.

  • arrest al gore for the attempt of murder of billions of people who would die if his cap and shit would be implemented.

  • The "Greenhouse Effect" per se doesn't exist. When you build two greenhouses, one of glass which supposedly traps heat, and one of quartz panes, which don't, there's no appreciable difference in the interior temperatures. Greenhouses are warmed entirely by stagnant air. If you pump one full of CO2 there's a tiny increase because CO2 does retain heat better than pure air. But it's less than 1% of air, even after 200 years of industry. The effect of man-made CO2 is *insignificant*.

  • theres so many variables its funny wen he think he solved it 4 36 bucks

  • what. the. hell. is. this

  • Simple explanation for the results, the bag with car exhaust was hot when it was filled, the bag with plain air was at the temperature of the air outside the bag. As the exhaust air cooled it contracted. Therefore the bag with exhaust created less insulation for the thermometer than the bag of plain air. Not meaning to be a skeptic, but this isn't really scientific, and doesn't do a very good job of contributing to the argument on our side. That is those of us who do not believe in man made GW

  • I think that this is a joke. It is funny because it is still more scientific than the hockey stick graph.

  • Your "simple explanation" has a few flaws mortsey:

    1.: Both Bags are on the same Temperature at start as you may see.

    2. Insulation from the outside Air is practicaly non existent because Air only insulates under pressure.

    3. If CO2 worked like a greenhouse gas, near 100% of it should keep most of the Suns warmth trapped. Which doesn't happened.

    You may also know that sience is not a believing thing. Either you know or you don't know (believe).

    Believing in man mad GW is more religious.

  • I hope this was meant as a joke because other wise it's just sad.

  • Waters a better greenhouse gas than c02. look at mars

  • actually no. water vapor is a pretty bad greenhouse gas compared to CO2. it has narrower absorption bands and tends to condense out of the atmosphere.

  • That's flat out wrong. Water has a much wider band - I guess you must get your info from the Huffington Post comment section.

  • I was referring to the ones in the inferred not in microwaves.

  • Water easily beats out CO2 in this respect.

    Google "solarspectrum.png" and look at the graph.

  • who's talking about solar radiation. CO2 captures re-radiated heat from the ground and oceans. and again look at 4-5 micrometers and 10-20micrometers. especially 4 micrometers as this is in the black body of the earth and there is a nice fat absorption band in CO2 and guess what the atmosphere as a whole too.

  • Jesus i am sure you can do that experiment with no wind and in jars or seal plastic boxes so all the wind and the needle stuck in the bag is avoided. Good idea

  • revise your tags buddy get this seen

  • 3pm to 4pm on a winter day and the temperature outside goes lower?

  • This is a case of, Do as I say, not as I do. The elitist will continue to live in their four mansions & fly on private jets and run up electric bills 20X of the rest of us. They have no intension of stopping their life styles to save the planet. Of course these eco nuts will kill off billions of humans that can not be supported with green farming will not include themselves on that list. The rest of us, the great unwashed to the elitists, will have to live in caves or like the Unibomber

  • wtf is this video just completely stupid?does he think that the global warming comes from the heat of the CO2?Has he ever read about global warming?warming is produced when light and heat that comes from the sun cannot go back into the atmosphere becase the CO2 reflects it back to earth .go to school ;)

  • well now you, and all the other regurgitating sheeple masses look mighty stupid thanks to climategate.

  • CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas. The effect is mainly caused by water vapor. The infared reflecting and absorbtion part. "Global warming" on the other hand is caused by the Sun. Stay in school.

  • @Bumbler19 the sun aint warming up fast enough for making an effect that you could notice withing 20-30 years.

  • Sure hasn't been trapping much heat around here...

  • The average person has been misled and is confused about what the current Global Warming debate is about, greenhouse gases. None of which has anything to do

    with air pollution. People are confusing Smog, Carbon Monoxide (CO) and the pollutants in

    car exhaust with the life supporting, essential trace gas in our atmosphere, Carbon Dioxide (CO2).

  • lmao..too funny! Not exactly scientific, but beats watching albore spew gases. Hey, why are we still not hearing much about that little 'ice cube' our esteemed climate researchers had conveniently (or "inconveniently" :) 'misplaced'? and just recently re-'discovered'? oh well..no big deal..it's ONLY the size of California! How bout a vid on that? & our 'climate' satellite that failed & went kerplunk in the ocean..near the arctic cap? or the HUGE rally in DC that was hit with a blizzard??? lol

  • ahh yes dangerous, fear rural minesotans they will rise up and wipe you out.

  • TO bad co2 was much higher in the past before Fossil Fuel burning by man !!! Just google climate in the carboniferous .

  • Yeah pretty much it used to be a lot higher.

  • Haha, that's funny. Just to be sure, seriously, this measurement has nothing to do with the greenhouse effect. The absorption, if it is the reason, is dominated by the absorption of solar radiation in your bags. In the greenhouse effect case, it is about the infrared thermal radiation of Earth.

  • makes sense to me.

    lol... 'Ezra'

  • Those thermometers will vary a few degrees from each other you can probably buy five of them and they will read 5 different temps.

  • Yeah pretty much and global warming is pure bunk.

  • Which is why they now refer to "global Warming" as "Climate Change". that way they cover their bases no matter which way the temperature goes.

  • sonovox01 [[ Which is why they now refer to "global Warming" as "Climate Change". that way they cover their bases no matter which way the temperature goes. ]]

    exaaaaaactly. gotta enslave the world, including OUR SOVEREIGN COUNTRY, to those global taxes somehow. the ignorance of the masses is disheartening, to say the least.

  • Seriously - he puts two bags out in a field and finds the exhaust filled bag to be cooler - ergo trying to measure climate change is a waste of money.

    The duelling banjo background music is entirely approriate...

  • Your experiment is just as valid as many of the Government sponsored 'studies'. Thanks, that was fun.

  • Riot!

  • Keep it up fellas, there's still a few "Al Gore is a big fat liar" deniers out there.

  • We're all gonna die! Does Al Gore know about this?

  • FIRST!!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more