- Joined
- Apr 20, 2014
- Messages
- 9,583
- Reaction score
- 5,866
- Points
- 113
Short version of https://www.omicsonline.org/open-ac...-an-Empirical-Planetary-Temperature-Model.pdf
Conclusions -
First clue, greenhouses don't actually work like the eponymous theory describes.
So, they came up with a model that does predict planetary temperature using only two variables - solar radiation and atmospheric pressure.
Summary -
Wow, a model that sort of works. Maybe now we can have the scientific community actually use the scientific method to inspect this bullshit greenhouse-gas/AGW theory.
The radiative greenhouse theory cannot explain this apparent paradox considering the fact that infrared-absorbing gases such as CO2, water vapor and methane only re-radiate available LW emissions and do not constitute significant heat storage or a net source of additional energy to the system. This raises a fundamental question about the origin of the observed energy surplus in the lower troposphere of terrestrial planets with respect to the solar input. The above inconsistencies between theory and observations prompted us to take a new look at the mechanisms controlling the atmospheric thermal effect.
Conclusions -
For 190 years the atmosphere has been thought to warm Earth by absorbing a portion of the outgoing LW infrared radiation and reemitting it back toward the surface, thus augmenting the incident solar flux. This conceptualized continuous absorption and downward reemission of thermal radiation enabled by certain trace gases known to be transparent to solar rays while opaque to electromagnetic long-wavelengths has been likened to the trapping of heat by glass greenhouses, hence the term ‘atmospheric greenhouse effect’. Of course, we now know that real greenhouses preserve warmth not by trapping infrared radiation but by physically obstructing the convective heat exchange between a greenhouse interior and the exterior environment. Nevertheless, the term ‘greenhouse effect’ stuck in science.
The hypothesis that a freely convective atmosphere could retain (trap) radiant heat due its opacity has remained undisputed since its introduction in the early 1800s even though it was based on a theoretical conjecture that has never been proven experimentally. It is important to note in this regard that the well-documented enhanced absorption of thermal radiation by certain gases does not imply an ability of such gases to trap heat in an open atmospheric environment. This is because, in gaseous systems, heat is primarily transferred (dissipated) by convection (i.e. through fluid motion) rather than radiative exchange. If gases of high LW absorptivity/emissivity such as CO , methane and water vapor were indeed capable of trapping radiant heat, they could be used as insulators. However, practical experience has taught us that thermal radiation losses can only be reduced by using materials of very low LW absorptivity/emissivity and correspondingly high thermal reflectivity such as aluminum foil. These materials are known among engineers at NASA and in the construction industry as radiant barriers [129]. It is also known that high-emissivity materials promote radiative cooling. Yet, all climate models proposed since 1800s are built on the premise that the atmosphere warms Earth by limiting radiant heat losses of the surface through the action of infrared absorbing gases aloft.
First clue, greenhouses don't actually work like the eponymous theory describes.
So, they came up with a model that does predict planetary temperature using only two variables - solar radiation and atmospheric pressure.
- andTo our knowledge, this is the first model accurately describing the average surface temperatures of planetary bodies throughout the Solar System in the context of a thermodynamic continuum using a common set of drivers.
greenhouse-gas concentrations and/or partial pressures did not show any meaningful relationship to surface temperatures across a broad span of planetary environments considered in our study (see Figures 1 and 2 and Table 5).
Summary -
• The ‘greenhouse effect’ is not a radiative phenomenon driven by the atmospheric infrared optical depth as presently believed, but a pressure-induced thermal enhancement analogous to adiabatic heating and independent of atmospheric composition;
• The down-welling LW radiation is not a global driver of surface warming as hypothesized for over 100 years but a product of the near-surface air temperature controlled by solar heating and atmospheric pressure;
• The albedo of planetary bodies with tangible atmospheres is not an independent driver of climate but an intrinsic property (a byproduct) of the climate system itself. This does not mean that the cloud albedo cannot be influenced by external forcing such as solar wind or galactic cosmic rays. However, the magnitude of such influences is expected to be small due to the stabilizing effect of negative feedbacks operating within the system. This understanding explains the observed remarkable stability of planetary albedos;
• The equilibrium surface temperature of a planet is bound to remain stable (i.e. within ± 1 K) as long as the atmospheric mass and the TOA mean solar irradiance are stationary. Hence, Earth’s climate system is well buffered against sudden changes and has no tipping points;
• The proposed net positive feedback between surface temperature and the atmospheric infrared opacity controlled by water vapor appears to be a model artifact resulting from a mathematical decoupling of the radiative-convective heat transfer rather than a physical reality.
The hereto reported findings point toward the need for a paradigm shift in our understanding of key macro-scale atmospheric properties and processes. The implications of the discovered planetary thermodynamic relationship (Figure 4, Eq. 10a) are fundamental in nature and require careful consideration by future research. We ask the scientific community to keep an open mind and to view the results presented herein as a possible foundation of a new theoretical framework for future exploration of climates on Earth and other worlds.
Wow, a model that sort of works. Maybe now we can have the scientific community actually use the scientific method to inspect this bullshit greenhouse-gas/AGW theory.