Carbon Dioxide, Methane and Greenhouse Gasses: Our Friends! By James Reed
Scientist Douglas J. Cotton, is one of a number of scientists who are beginning a systematic challenge of climate change dogmas. One of the key planks of present-day climate change hysteria is that greenhouse gasses, so called, such as carbon dioxide and methane, and nitrogen as well, are harmful because of their warming effects, raising the average global temperature. Dr Cotton, in a paper referenced below, shows that the warming effects of such gasses are mythical, given the thermodynamics (heat-nature) of the open climate system, which is dynamic, and not like a classical closed system like a fish bowl. He believes that scientists such as him, chipping away at these dogmas will bring the climate change hysterical system down by 2025, but here I think he vastly under-estimates how much political millage the elites get from this, which goes far being Covid. As some critics have noted, climate change hysteria is a way of deconstructing Western civilisation, and that is the real agenda.
“It is truly a sad reflection on education in the last few decades that so many politicians, academics, and even research scientists have been utterly fooled by what is nothing but fictitious, fiddled physics supposedly proving that water vapor, carbon dioxide, and methane can, because of their radiating properties, raise the global mean surface temperature. The late Canadian Professor Tim Ball (whom I met) called it the biggest scam in history in his TV interviews and books. A retired physicist became ashamed of himself for having taught such false, unsupported "science," as you can read at the foot of the home page on my website. Why would you continue denying the laws of long-established physics, which can be used to explain why these gases cool us — water vapor by a few degrees, but carbon dioxide and methane by less than 0.1 degrees?
Surely you don't believe the climatology claims that water vapor does most of "33 degrees" of warming at average concentration! If it did, then how much warming do you believe it would do in a rainforest, where the concentration may well be three times as great? It is water vapor in humid Singapore that caps the maximum daily temperature, such that it rarely exceeds 33°C any day of the year. My study of real-world data confirmed such cooling, and the valid physics in my 2013 paper, "Planetary Core and Surface Temperatures," explains how it is the result of well-known laws of physics.
It is now over a decade since Professor Claes Johnson and I (in my peer-reviewed 2012 paper, "Radiated Energy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics") explained why radiation from the above gases to a warmer surface does not, and cannot, raise the surface temperature. To do so would violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics because there is no other process interacting simultaneously with such radiation. Thus, climatologists are wrong in excusing the violation based on "net" effects of various processes. They are also wrong in using the Stefan-Boltzmann Law in physics for the sum of solar and atmospheric radiation, because that law only ever applies for a single source. As physicists have known since the 1870s, it is gravity that establishes the observed temperature gradient in all planetary tropospheres, not the so-called "radiative forcing" invented by climatologists.
I expect physicists in particular to do their due diligence and look into what I have written in several papers, linked from the above website. I may follow up with FOIA requests and official accusations or court proceedings. Neither the IPCC nor the CSIRO can produce correct physics or any evidence supporting their claims. Temperature data (such as at drroyspencer.com) shows net cooling since the peak in 1998.
I predict that the whole scam will be defeated by 2025 and that there will be huge compensation payouts claimed by companies throughout the world. Truth will prevail.”
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2883465
Comments