I see that the Kiehl-Trenberth energy budget with its massive back radiation of 333 W/m2 is highlighted on page 2, and on page 15 a greenhouse effect G is defined as
- G = sigma T_s^4 - F_TOA = 390 - 235 = 155 W/m2
where T_s is surface temp and F_TOA top of the atmosphere outward flux.
Judy says that she prefers not to use the term back radiation, yet it is presented to the students as a pillar of CO2 alarmism, resulting in a massive greenhouse effect of 155 W/m2.
According to Kuhn the current paradigm is represented in text books and university courses forming the minds of the next generation of scientists.
Judy thus points me to an example of indoctrination into CO2 alarmism at a major US university, for which Judy is responsible.
Is this fair to the students, Judy? Is it fair to the readers of your blog Judy to feed them with double-speak?
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar