by Australian Senator Gerard Rennick

If gases are poor conductors of heat, how is it that a CO2 molecule, a gas, can heat up 10,000 surrounding N2/O2 molecules, also gases, by 1 degree each?

One in ten thousand is the same as 100 in a million which is the ratio that climate alarmists claim that an extra 100 CO2 molecules per million has heated the entire atmosphere by a degree.

It can’t happen. It’s all a lie.

Gases are poor conductors of heat because their particles are widely spaced, reducing the frequency of collisions and energy transfer.

In solids, the particles are closely packed together, which allows for easy and quick transfer of energy from one particle to another. This is why solids are generally good conductors of heat. However, in gases, the particles are far apart from each other. This wide spacing means that the particles have to travel greater distances to collide with each other and transfer energy. As a result, the process of energy transfer is much slower in gases, making them poor conductors of heat.

The process of heat conduction in gases is also affected by the low density of gases. The density of a substance is directly related to the number of particles present in a given volume. Since gases have a low density, they have fewer particles in a given volume compared to solids or liquids. This further reduces the frequency of collisions and hence the rate of energy transfer.

Moreover, gases are poor conductors of heat because they have a low specific heat capacity. Specific heat capacity is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one kilogram of a substance by one degree Celsius. Gases generally have a lower specific heat capacity than solids or liquids, which means they require less heat to increase their temperature. This property makes them less effective at conducting heat.

In addition, the random and rapid motion of gas particles also contributes to their poor heat conduction. Unlike in solids where particles vibrate around fixed positions, gas particles move freely and randomly. This random motion means that even when a particle gains energy and moves faster, it may not necessarily collide with another particle to transfer that energy. Instead, it might just move away, carrying the energy with it. This randomness in motion further slows down the process of energy transfer, making gases poor conductors of heat.

In conclusion, the wide spacing of particles, low density, low specific heat capacity, and random motion of particles in gases all contribute to their poor heat conduction.

To those who say global warming is about radiation not convection, it’s actually about both.

Yes, CO2 does absorb radiation but it mainly absorbs it in the 14.8 micron infrared range of electromagnetic energy. See the above picture under the blue range in the CO2 row. To understand just how weak this energy is, it is in the vibrational rotational transition range not the electronic.

What this means is, is that the energy of the photon absorbed in this range is so weak that it can’t even make an electron jump to an outer orbit in the CO2 molecule which is called an electronic transition.

Yet the climate alarmists want you to believe the same photon can heat up 10,000 surrounding molecules of N2/O2 via conduction which as pointed out in the previous post are poor conductors of heat.

Just another piece of information to destroy the climate cult’s narrative.