July 27, 2024

Point 1

There is not the slightest possibility of one molecule in 2,500 influencing the atmosphere no matter what its temperature is or what it does. Divide anything carbon dioxide does by 2,500 and it's irrelevant.

A small amount of something cannot heat a large amount of something without extreme differences in temperature which cannot exist in the atmosphere.

One brick in 2,500 bricks is not going to heat the other 2,499 bricks. The atmosphere cannot be any different than that. Molecules cannot heat molecules any differently in the atmosphere than elsewhere.

Point 2

There is almost no radiation for carbon dioxide to absorb. So all of the radiation gets absorbed in a short distance of travel, so more carbon dioxide cannot absorb more radiation, which real scientists call saturation.

Point 3

When physicists noticed in a laboratory, almost 200 years ago, that carbon dioxide absorbs infrared radiation, they assumed it must be heating the atmosphere. What they missed is that the absorbed energy is emitted as fast as it is absorbed.

Incompetents in physics see an absorption peak for carbon dioxide in the Earth's radiation spectrum and tell themselves that absorption equals heat. It's the first point they argue.

What they don't see is that the energy is emitted at the broadband wavelengths produced by all substances in proportion to their temperature. All molecules emit broadband, infrared radiation, called black body radiation, because heat is vibration of molecules and vibrations create waves.
 

 
Point 4

The entire atmosphere emits radiation; and a transparent gas such as the atmosphere emits radiation much more readily than opaque solids such as the surface of the Earth. That's why the air can cool 20°C during nights. How can energy be trapped for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, while the entire atmosphere emits energy rapidly? It can't.

Point 5

Over time, the concept developed that nothing heats the atmosphere but greenhouse gases. That's missing the conduction, convection and evaporation that actually heats the atmosphere. Physicists have a concept of the conduction, convection and evaporation; but they allowed incompetents to promote the error, which showed up at the top of every state and local web site on so-called climate change for many years. It gave the public the impression that carbon dioxide and so-called greenhouse gases are the determining factors in the temperature of the atmosphere.

Point 6

Most of the sun's radiation goes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the surface of the Earth. That radiation is too high of a frequency to be absorbed by carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide absorbs three narrow bands of longwave radiation at 2.7, 4.3 and 15 microns.

Only cold substances such as the surface of the Earth emit such long wavelengths for carbon dioxide to absorb; and cold substances emit almost no radiation. So there is almost no radiation for carbon dioxide to absorb. The small amount of radiation available to carbon dioxide gets absorbed by the time it travels a short distance; so more carbon dioxide cannot absorb more radiation, which is called saturation. Real scientists measured that result more than a century ago, but incompetents in physics ignore anything but rationalizations for their absurd assumptions.

Point 7

The real heat that enters the atmosphere occurs as wind blowing over the surface picks up heat through conduction, convection and evaporation. Then the energy in the atmosphere radiates into space in the same amount as absorbed, which is equilibrium. All dynamic systems move toward equilibrium. So to rationalize their erroneous concept, physicists said the atmospheric emissions are not in equilibrium. They said there is 3.7 watts per square meter less energy being emitted as absorbed. The total entering from the sun is said to be 1367 W/m². The amount leaving is then 1363.3 W/m², which is disequilibrium.

No such thing as disequilibrium is possible. What they would have needed for their purpose was a shift upward in the equilibrium temperature. But they had no method of determining such a complex result. So they used a fake disequilibrium to contrive a numerical result. A disequilibrium would mean constantly increasing number; but that is not the result they wanted. They wanted a fixed temperature increase for each increment of carbon dioxide increase.

Point 8

Physicists said that doubling the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would "trap heat" in the atmosphere resulting in 3.7 W/m² less energy leaving than entering with the result being an atmospheric temperature increase of 1°C. Watts are rate of change, which should show a constantly increasing temperature, not a fixed 1°C. That's why people pay for watt-hours, not watts.

Point 9

To get the desired result of 1°C temperature increase for doubling carbon dioxide, physicists divided the atmosphere into many slices and pretended to calculate the amount of energy leaving each slice and entering the ones above it. When they got to the top of the atmosphere, they said the result was 3.7 W/m² less leaving than entering. They used the world's largest computers to get that result, so no one could reproduce the result; and there wasn't enough published information to even determine the details of what they did. They called that procedure, radiative transfer equations. To promote the value of radiative transfer equations physicists claimed that the procedure is so informative that they can calculate the temperature of the atmosphere of Venus with it.

Point 10

Then physicists multiplied the 1°C to 3°C saying the basic increase in temperature produces a secondary effect by putting more water vapor into the atmosphere, while water vapor absorbs radiation more strongly than carbon dioxide.

Point 11

Each of the so-called greenhouse gases is given a strength which includes how long it stays in the atmosphere. There is no such thing as how long a molecule stays in the atmosphere. The ones near the surface move in and out more rapidly than the ones higher up. Normally, an exchange rate is used to compare the rate going into the atmosphere with the rate going out.

The exchange rate with the ocean changes with temperature, as warmer oceans release more carbon dioxide and colder oceans absorb more. In that way, the oceans determine how much carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere, not humans. The oceans have been warming, as they always do between ice ages resulting in more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere varies with seasons due to natural absorption and emission.

Point 12

Looking out the window and seeing heat is not how science is produced. The extreme temperature increases of recent times are far greater than claims for carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is distributed quite uniformly in the atmosphere and supposedly resulted in less than 1.5°C increase since the industrial revolution. Yet the temperature extremes vary by 10°C or more. Carbon dioxide could not produce localized extremes of that sort by any claim of what it is supposed to do. So why the extremes?

What is noticeable on weather charts is that the wind stops blowing resulting in high pressure air masses which produce a lot of heat. Then humidity increases in the high pressure zones, until pressure or temperature drops causing the moisture to all come out at once resulting in floods. So the recent result is extreme temperatures combined with floods. That result is caused by wind not blowing over the surface as usual. It takes wind to produce evaporative cooling, particularly over oceans. So why did the wind stop blowing in so many places? Certainly not because of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.