JoNova reminds about a "forgotten paper that deserves more attention: Idso 1998":
- Sherwood Idso does calculations from eight completely different natural experiments which all arrive at similar figures. In short, he reviewed 20 years of work to arrive at a prediction that if CO2 is doubled we will get 0.4°C of warming at most, and even he admitted, it might be an overestimate.
I have come to the same conclusions based on simple models based on observation. In short: Whatever the "greenhouse effect" may be, it appears to be too small to be possible to detect.
One way of expressing this is to say that the "greenhouse effect" has no effect and as an effect without effect does not qualify to be termed "greenhouse effect" in scientific literature.
Inlägg
Claes, you have already written about Gerlich and Tscheuschner's "Falsification of the Greenhouse Effect". The only thing that is missing is a real physics laboratory experiment to demonstrate the nonsense of what climate scientists believe. Sadly, they claim real physics lab experiments can't possibly model the complexity of the atmosphere. They also claim they can't do controlled experiments on the earth's atmosphere, because there is only one. So climate science rests on CO2 IRabsorbing dogma and no possibility of demonstrating the reality of this in a lab.
SvaraRaderaWhy are the experimental physicists missing in all of this????
(Maybe there is another political agenda????)