The Required Greenhouse Effect
Post #465
IPCC scientists promote the idea that carbon dioxide emissions have been causing most of the recent global warming, but this requires (seriously, it is required) a greenhouse gas layer that warms faster than the surface does. Here is the incoming and outgoing energy:
There are 8 arrows depicted in this graph, but only one of them is involved in the greenhouse gas effect which IPCC must (seriously, they must) rely on to continue to claim that carbon dioxide emissions are behind most of the recent global warming.
Here is the same graph with the single arrow identified:
If the greenhouse gas layer — which is found 3 to 6 miles above the surface — warms faster than the surface does, then the “back radiation” arrow depicted in the graph can function. If the surface warms faster than the greenhouse gas layer does, then that arrow’s effect is muted.
Heat flows from hot bodies to cool ones, not the other way around. Physicists call it a law of thermodynamics, and even IPCC scientists are not allowed to violate that law. Here is a graph (bottom section) showing a time series of a subtraction: (surface temperature anomaly) - (troposphere temperature anomaly).
But if the greenhouse effect is substantial, and you take the surface temperature and subtract the troposphere temperature (where the greenhouse gas layer is found), and you watch it over time, then the subtraction would begin to produce increasingly-negative numbers.
Here is the same graph showing what proof of a greenhouse gas effect looks like:
It is especially apparent from 1980 to 2000 that the greenhouse gas effect was not only not substantial, but more-or-less nonexistent (trending in the opposite direction than where it should be trending).
Evidence suggests that it is physically impossible for the greenhouse gas effect to be the predominant cause of global warming — because that requires a gas layer that warms faster than the surface of the earth.
Note: Recent NOAA STAR data (i.e., “government data”) do suggest more tropospheric warming, but that is counterbalanced by University of Alabama-Huntsville data which suggest that the troposphere has not warmed sufficiently for a substantial greenhouse gas effect.
Reference
[incoming and outgoing energy] — NASA. What is Earth’s Energy Budget? Five Questions with a Guy Who Knows. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/langley/what-is-earth-s-energy-budget-five-questions-with-a-guy-who-knows
[the time series of “surface-troposphere” contradicts the claim that CO2 emissions are behind most of the recent warming] — IPCC. https://archive.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/059.htm
I think there are big factors other than CO2 in climate change.
Major preconditions for global warming are largely unknown and unexplored.
Therefore, isn't it dangerous for mankind to try to control the temperature only by increasing or decreasing CO2?
(1) Status and fluctuations of solar fusion = Unknown → Changes in solar radiation = Unknown → Temperature
:: It is thought to be increasing in units of 100 million years, but the process of change is unknown.
(2) State of interstellar gas in the galaxy = unknown → amount of cosmic ray particles falling on the earth → amount of clouds → solar reflectance albedo → temperature
(3) Changes in the amount of sea water on the earth = unknown → water vapor → temperature
::It seems to be sucked in from the continental plate boundary.
(4) Heat generation and fluctuations due to nuclear fission inside the earth = Unknown → Temperature
(5) Magnetic field reversal due to changes in the motion of liquid iron inside the Earth = unknown → variation in cosmic ray particle amount → cloud amount → reflected amount → temperature
:: Certainly occurs every tens of thousands of years, but the mechanism and cycle are unknown
(6) Eruptions, meteorite crashes = Unpredictable → Sunlight blocked by dust → Temperature drop
(7) Cause of global freezing several times in the past = Unknown → If global freezing occurs, more than half of the organisms will die.
(8) Continental drift = Unknown → Impact on weather in general
:: It's true that we repeat coalescence and splitting in units of 100 million years.
(9) If CO2 is reduced, the environment will be harsh for plants, food for animals will be reduced, and humans will be reduced.
:: Not even a simulation