Tuesday, July 14, 2020

Climate: The Man-Made Warming Myth Explodes (Part 3)

https://principia-scientific.org/climate-the-man-made-warming-myth-explodes-part-3/

My reply:

 [[The results all indicate that carbon dioxide cannot be the driver of climate change. At best it can contribute only a small proportion to the change in global temperature since the end of the Little Ice Age. ]]

[[In some quantity, everything in the air including nitrogen and oxygen absorbs and emits black body radiation at frequencies which overlap the frequencies absorbed by CO2. In fact, the only reason why there is IR in the air is because the surface of the earth emits black body radiation in proportion to its temperature. The air then does the same thing at some level.]]

Zonk! Wrong!

This is a common misconception. Gases don't emit Planck (blackbody) radiation. Only coalesced substances (solids and liquids) do, because they have to be able to share their heat energy via molecular contact to attain a common temperature then emit heat energy through a surface in large quantities along a Planck power-wavelength curve of a characteristic shape whose peak power wavelength indicates the substance's temperature.

Gas molecules are constantly bouncing around and exchanging energy in an attempt at achieving equilibrium, but emit quantum energy only on a photon by photon basis, and everybody knows that the quantum world disappears at the macro level where Planck's Law rules. That's why the Stefan-Boltzmann Law has units of watts per square meter, not watts per cubic meter So much power is concentrated at the peak power wavelength that it characterizes the temperature to quantum precision via Wien's Displacement Law (T * wavelength = constant), which is why we can literally see temperature in an iron bar being heated in a fire, and measure temperatures with optical infrared  thermometers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien%27s_displacement_law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_thermometer

The Sun is a solid body with a coalesced surface, and it emits Planck radiation at a max power temperature of 5800K (5527C) (9980F), which travels through space to Earth's atmosphere, the visual wavelengths making it through unhampered and hitting Earth's surface, heating it up to as high as 50C and causing it to try to cool down by emitting Planck radiation. Space and air don't emit Planck radiation, but air does absorb heat from Earth's surface via conduction and vent it toward space via convection, helping slow the cooling process compared to pure radiation like on the unlivable Moon, i.e., air convection moderates the temperature swings to keep Earth livable. Air can absorb radiant energy, and reemit it on a photon by photon level, but never along a Planck radiation curve consisting of a spectrum of wavelengths, so it's not going to do diddly to raise the Earth's surface temperature but only waste its pathetic photons on materials emitting far more power at each of its wavelengths.

Sunlight's visual wavelengths are .4-.8 microns (6971C to 3349C), but since Earth's surface has a heat capacity of so many K per Joule per gram (4K/J/g for water, 0.7K/J/g for silicon or sand), at the radiant strength that reaches Earth's surface, Earth's Planck radiation wavelengths are 13 microns (-50C) to 9 microns (+50C).

Check my work with this online calculator: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/wiens-law

https://theengineeringmindset.com/specific-heat-capacity-of-materials/

Too bad, CO2's is a non-player in the global warming game, because its absorption/emission wavelength of 15 microns has a Planck radiation temperature of -80C, outside of Earth's surface temperature range, hence blaming it for global warming is a pure fake physics hoax. Atmospheric CO2's -80C photons can't melt an ice cube, and anybody pushing the CO2 global warming moose hockey should have their mouth washed out with soapy ice water. Nobody seeking to understand Earth's climate should waste one second with CO2, because only the Sun heats Earth's surface, and the atmosphere only cools it, acting not like a greenhouse but a chimney along with a blanket due to its thermal inertia, i.e., slowing of heat removal compared to pure radiation. If the Sun goes cold, Earth will freeze pronto,in  a few days probably, but thank you know who it keeps basting the Earth's surface like a rotisserie chicken, heating it up then allowing it to cool down over night endlessly

Real physicists (not fakey climatologist physics dropouts) like James Clerk Maxwell and Richard Feynman long ago used statistical mechanics to compute Earth's average temperature from the Sun's radiant power, Earth's gravity, and the specific heat of Earth's atmosphere, with CO2 or any gaseous radiation not included:

https://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2015/07/physicist-richard-feynman-proved.htm

This article by a biologist full of side issue data is nice if you have the time to waste, but the real question is why do we want to become unpaid climatologists when all we want to know is what effect if any CO2 has on global temperatures, and we now have the answer: ZILCHO!

So don't kowtow to the CO2 hoaxers with wishy-washy statements about CO2 having a "mild" effect on temperatures. -80C isn't even heat. You can't mention CO2 and heat in the same breath without talking nonsense. How many times do I have to beat this dead horse in the pages of P-S, which is supposed to have an educated readership?

Here's my killer essay for the masses that's waking people up and causing the leftist-run U.N. IPCC to be laughed into oblivion. If IPCC used even one millionth of its great wealth and power to distribute it, er, forget it, they're in it for the money.

http://www.historyscoper.com/mycousinco2.html





No comments:

Post a Comment

What Is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project?

It's too bad the current brouhaha about CO2 is so narrowly focused. So what if a higher concentration in the atmosphere raises global average temps? If higher temps were accompanied by increased atmospheric moisture, it would even out around the world and turn it into a paradise planet, greening the deserts so that the teeming billions could be fed. Cold temperatures are inimical to life, not a goal of life.

Too bad, it might take a lot more CO2 than you think to really change the global weather, but not because it has any control over Earth's surface temperatures. In fact atmospheric CO2 can't melt an ice cube with its 15 micron main radiation wavelength that has a Planck radiation temperature of -80C, colder than dry ice (-78.5C).

Why do they call CO2 greenhouse gas? Because plants breathe it, and they pump it into greenhouses to help them grow and thrive. Polar regions and deserts look good in postcards, but who wants to live there. Meanwhile global pop. is zooming, so obviously the real answer is to pump more CO2 and water vapor into the atmosphere to turn the Earth into a greenhouse, turning deserts both hot and cold into lush green crop-growing regions like 35 million years ago when the avg. global temp was 88F and the CO2 level was 1K parts per million (vs. 415 PPM today). So what if we lose some desert polar regions and even some yummy coastline, the adjustments will be inconvenient but temporary, but I prefer shirt-sleeve weather to Frosty the Snowman. How many arctic animals can't adapt to a warmer climate? What animal needs to live in ice and snow and wouldn't like a vacation to Tahiti? They can lose the fat, hair or feathers.

The real question is can we make and keep the global CO2/H20 levels high enough, and for how long? Sooner or later mass global starvation will become unstoppable if world pop. keeps climbing, and this is the way to forestall it, if we act soon enough. Don't give me them Malthusian objections, give me some CO2/H20 solutions. I like a paradise Earth in the possibility window.

So, while the world is debating the horrors, extent or lack thereof of global warming caused by CO2, let's engineer the CO2/H20 solution to making the Earth a warm temperate planet from pole to pole with no deserts or ice wastelands, allowing vastly more food to be grown and turning poor nations rich. I DON'T mean a planet with wild swings between super-hot summers and super-cold winters, but one that is warmer than now everywhere, but moister and greener, with a giant network of plant life helping to avoid extremes. Since CO2 and water vapor are the keys, and the paltry amounts in the atmosphere need to be increased as soon as possible to turn deserts green and get the warming process off to a good start, but the new levels have to be maintained permanently, I'm looking to remote Antarctica (which is really a sea) as the most promising source for unlimited CO2 and water vapor generation, given that noxious emissions (sulfur dioxide, etc.) can be controlled.

This blog is for posting news on the world climate situation, scientific and political, along with my own articles. I'm sure it will start out with hardly any interest or followers, but I'm hoping that it will attract the smartest people eventually and in the end I hope for a global consensus that if it can be done it must be done.

So what is the Antarctic Volcanoes Project? My working idea is that an international effort to reactivate as many volcanoes in Antarctica as possible in an ideal location for distributing the CO2/H20 will produce the best and most cost-effective results. Sorry, one-worlders, it won't give you a license to override and control any country's economy, but if your country is suffering from lack of food you will be too busy expanding farming to care. Hence until I think of or hear about a better way to increase world CO2/H20 levels, this is my pet project. If you are a scientist, please climb aboard my AVP Express and let's make it happen.

It Would Be Funny If It Were's So Sad

It would be funny it weren't so sad, but when the scientists say "greenhouse gas" they are using a malaprop. It should be greenhouse GLASS, because that's why a greenhouse stays warm, by glass walls stopping convection of air and trapping heat. Yes, CO2 is pumped into greenhouses, but not for heating purposes, only to help plants BREATHE. So the whole sucker's game of "greenhouse gas" must truly be for the purpose of stopping more vegetation from growing and feeding the teeming billions. Is that their true goal? Another blip on the horizon is the promise of melting permafrost releasing gigantic amounts of CO2 from the Arctic not Antarctic sector. Let's hope we at least get some more good CO2 that way.

Jan. 14, 2011. Good article on CO2 levels and global temps 30-40 million years ago

Aug. 31, 2011. Giant pipe and balloon to pump water into the sky in climate experiment

May 31, 2013. Scientists find that higher CO2 levels green arid regions

Mar. 30, 2015. Higher atmospheric CO2 levels causing boom in vegetation

Aug. 2015. 'Unprecedented' volcanic eruption released enough water vapor to heat Earth: report

Aug. 15, 2017. Scientists find 91 new volcanoes miles beneath Antarctica's thick ice sheet

How Much CO2 Do Volcanoes Emit?

Will a major volcanic eruption fix climate change? - James Matkin

Part of the heat is coming from beneath our feet

Did any volcanoes erupt in 2020?

T.L. Winslow (TLW, the Historyscoper (tm)

My Blog List

Total Pageviews