All descriptions of a supposed greenhouse effect on the internet say that greenhouse gases block radiation and heat the atmosphere. Humans adding more greenhouse gas supposedly add more heat to the atmosphere. The gas is not the limiting factor; so more gas will not do something more.

The Atmosphere	Alarmist Assumptions

At the scientific level, rationalizers look for a situation represented by the image on the right, where some radiation would go through. At first, they said molecules on the shoulders of the absorption peaks are thin and do what is shown in the image on the right. But that claim would not stand up to criticism; so they switched to the upper atmosphere, where molecules are thinner. The molecules don't get thin enough until they reach the upper stratosphere.

The insurmountable problem of rationalizers is that when the molecules get thin enough to allow radiation through, they spread the heat so thin that no significant temperature increase occurs. The molecules would have to be one thousandth as dense as at the surface. But that means one thousandths as much temperature change for each unit of heat.

One of the rationalizations is that satellites find the key radiation going through the atmosphere, therefore saturation does not exist. Satellites cannot determine where narrow bands of radiation come from. Satellites will always find something coming from the top of the stratosphere, which says nothing about the near-surface atmosphere or even the upper troposphere.

Here's an IPCC quote: "Carbon dioxide absorbs infrared radiation in the middle of its 15 mm band to the extent that radiation in the middle of this band cannot escape unimpeded: this absorption is saturated. This, however, is not the case for the band’s wings." http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/044.htm

Here's how the numbers add up:

Some not-so-bright alarmist scientists told the non-scientists that greenhouse gases increased the temperature of the atmosphere by 33°C. This concept is the first and primary point made on greenhouse gases throughout the internet. Sometimes the 33°C will be omitted and replaced by the statement that without greenhouse gases, the atmosphere would be freezing cold.

This concept begins with the Stefan-Boltzmann constant, which says the earth's temperature without an atmosphere would be -18°C, because it has to emit 235 watts per square meter, as the sun adds to the earth. But with an atmosphere, the near-surface average temperature is 15°C, which is 33°C warmer. All 33°C is attributed to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by the persons who promote this concept. They didn't realize that most heat gets into the atmosphere through conduction, convection and evaporation. No real scientists could have missed these points.

The NASA energy budget says 41% of the energy leaving the earth's surface is through radiation, while 59% is through conduction and evaporation. This means the 33°C must be reduced to 13.53°C for greenhouse gases absorbing radiation. But 30% of the radiation goes around greenhouse gases, which means 70% is blocked by greenhouse gases. This results in 9.47°C attributed to greenhouse gases. CO2 is 8% of the black body bandwidth. So the amount of heating of the atmosphere attributable to CO2 is 1.08°C prior to human influences.

If the amount (density) of CO2 in the near-surface atmosphere must be reduced to one thousandth to allow radiation to go through, then the temperature increase must also be reduced to one thousandth, which is 0.00108°C. But it is actually worse due to compounding effects.

Example:

Consider the near-surface, non-saturation concept. If CO2 added 1.08°C to the near-surface atmosphere prior to human influences, while the center of the absorption peak saturates in ten meters, the shoulders which represent one thousandth of the CO2 would absorb completely in 10 kilometers (ignoring pressure change, which would make the problem worse). These molecules would represent one thousandth of the heat, spread over a thousand times as much distance. This means one millionth as much temperature increase as the rest of the CO2 produced. Dividing 1.08°C by a million yields 1.08 millionth of a degree centigrade as the amount of increase that can be produced by the non-saturated shoulder molecules.

If shoulders of the absorption peaks are defined as one hundredth of the CO2 rather than one thousandth, then the 1.08°C is divided by 100 for fraction of heat and again by 100 for dilution of temperature, which is a result of 0.108 thousandth of a degree centigrade spread over the first kilometer of height. This increases the temperature a trivial amount but leaves the effect near the surface and dependent upon shoulder molecules, which is no longer the mechanism being promoted.

For these reasons, alarmist scientists decided they would look for the effect higher in the troposphere, variously at 5 or 9 kilometers up. They run into similar problems up there plus a lot more, as described on the saturation page.

—not to mention the fact that they did this recently, which erased the first 20 years of settled science on the subject plus 150 years of impeccable witchcraft.

Why Global Warming Science is Nothing but Fraud