- CO2 alarmism is based on irrational climate science.
- Thermodynamics with radiation offers a basis to rational climate science.
The project is backed by a team of skeptics including scientists and scientific writers and contains a two volume book, with the first volume to appear this year, and the second volume next year.
My contributions build on my recent work on thermodynamics and radiation exposed
in Computational Thermodynamics and Computational Blackbody Radiation and on this blog.
Inlägg
Interesting project! I wish you good luck. However, I'm slightly alarmed by reading the following chapter synopsis
SvaraRaderaExamination of CO2 alarmist argument of "back radiation" or "Downwelling Longwave Radiation" - DLR - is a computed fictional quantity; positing of argument that real radiative flux between two blackbodies (e.g. Earth and Atmosphere) is determined by their temperature difference and not by emission spectra.
Again, according to GE Hypothesis, the temperature gradient is a result of the radiative flux between atmospheric layers, not the other way around. Slaying the dragon will be accomplished when the temperature gradient is explained and quantified as a result of either
1. Thermodynamics with gravity
2. Erroneous temperature measurements
3. Heat conduction according to Fouriers law
4. Some mechanism yet to be discovered
I would be happy to add some comments to a serious collaborative attempt to slay the real Dragon.
I agree: The temp gradient is not the result of radiative flux between atm layers, but is determined by thermodyn + gravity, as will be shown...
SvaraRaderaLet me guess:
SvaraRaderaFerenc M. Miskolczi: Greenhouse effect in semi-transparent planetary atmospheres; IDÖJÁRÁS , Quarterly Journal of the Hungarian Meteorological Service, Vol. 111, No. 1, January–March 2007, pp. 1–40 - http://www.met.hu/idojaras/IDOJARAS_vol111_No1_01.pdf
Not precisely...
SvaraRaderaBut close?
SvaraRaderaAnyway, I intended to buy your book. Apropos: any idea when it might become available (not the Kindle version)?
(sorry for the “anonymous” posting – it’s only because I can’t understand instructions in Swedish. My e-mail is miso.alkalaj@ijs.si)
You'll see. In December, I hope.
SvaraRaderaIf there is no greenhouse effect, how do you explain measurements that show less outgoing radiation from Earth at the absorption frequencies of CO2 and methane?
SvaraRadera"Increases in greenhouse forcing inferred from the outgoing longwave radiation spectra of the Earth in 1970 and 1997," J.E. Harries et al, Nature 410, 355-357 (15 March 2001).
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v410/n6826/abs/410355a0.html
I speak about an atmosphere effect as a combination of thermodynamics and radiation, and there is no greenhouse effect of radiation alone.
SvaraRadera