- We need to raise the level of our game in terms of explaining the planetary warming by infrared absorption of CO2 etc. The missing area of understanding seems to be the actual physical mechanism.
måndag 13 december 2010
In Search of a Lost Greenhouse Effect
Judith Curry is making a heroic effort to find the physics of the atmospheric "greenhouse effect", which is much talked about but nobody has really seen:
In the recent post CO2 No Feedback Sensitivity Curry questions even the very starting point of CO2 alarmism, namely a climate sensitivity of 1 C from a direct application of Stefan-Boltzmann's Law Q = sigma T^4, which in differentiated form with Q ~ 280 W/m2 and T ~ 280 K reads dQ ~ 4 dT and thus gives dT ~ 1 C upon input of "radiative forcing" of dQ ~ 4 W/m^2.
This is along the criticism I have expressed: To take 1 C as a starting point for various feedbacks is not science, because the formula Q = sigma T^4 as a model of global climate is so utterly simplistic: One can as well argue that one should take 0 C as starting point, and then enormous feedbacks would be required.
Curry admits that she does not know the physics ("the actual physical mechanism") of any atmospheric greenhouse effect, and she asks if there is anyone somewhere out there in cyberspace who does. Isn't this strange? Is the greenhouse effect dead? Was it never alive?
Compare with Slaying the Sky Dragon: Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory (now #1 on Amazon ebook lists).