Monday, February 14, 2011

A formal disproof of the Greenhouse Effect, with the help of Jupiter

My grasp of physics is not up to a critical evaluation of the post below but it sounds right -- JR

Some of the readers of this blog might wonder if it is necessary to provide any more disproof of the GE. In any case, by now there are at least 367 proofs of Pythagora's theorem, so I thought I could contribute with disproof nr 368 of the Greenhouse Effect. It is not entirely my own, I think it has been suggested before. For this purpose we will take a closer look at Jupiter.

In the article "Rethinking the Greenhouse Effect" by Alan Siddons, it is shown among other things that at 1 bar of pressure, all planets have temperatures much larger than a blackbody temperature estimate would yield. Facts of this kind are important in the search for the correct explanation for the heating impact of the atmosphere. The question I now ask is whether there is information contained in this data with which we can immediately rule out the old theory, that is the existence of any radiative greenhouse effect at all.

The gas giant Jupiter has a multifaceted "atmosphere", but below 1 bar of pressure it is almost entirely composed of hydrogen and helium (Alan may correct me if I'm wrong). And the amazing thing is that below this pressure the temperature decreases. Ok, so what? In previous posts I have argued and demonstrated that

1. The canonical greenhouse hypothesis says that in the absence of radiative forcing from greenhouse gases the temperature of the atmosphere will (on average) be the same at all altitudes (pressures).

2. Any attempt to mathematically reformulate the greenhouse hypothesis such that it implies a heating of the entire atmosphere is bound to lead to a runaway effect (unless there are other factors incorporated that can not be expressed in mathematical terms, such as divine intervention).

If we now add the observation

3. Jupiter has a temperature gradient below 1 bar of pressure, which is not maintained by greenhouse gases.

Ergo, the greenhouse hypothesis is falsified. This disproof has the character of a mathematical proof in the sense that each step is simple, but in the end you reach a conclusion that was maybe not obvious from the beginning. But it is not lengthy nor complicated, it could be understood by any scientist who is willing to listen.


"Extremes" are normal

Steven Goddard has up a series of news reports indicating how egotistical it is to see weather events in our lifetime as being particularly noteworthy or unusual. I reproduce some of them below






The Weather Isn't Getting Weirder

The latest research belies the idea that storms are getting more extreme
















Economist: Green energy cannot be defended as a source of jobs








One cannot simply wish these realities away."


Gingrich Tells CPAC That He Would Elimate the EPA

Good for America but not good to a public brainwashed by the Leftist media. "Reform" would go down a lot better

The Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual event where conservative politicians and activists get together in something akin to a pep rally, has come to an end. The event can be seen as a sort of a bellwether for the pet causes of the movement, and this year conservatives placed a target squarely on the back of the EPA. In fact, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is rumored to be a presidential candidate, doubled down on his call for shutting down and replacing the EPA altogether.

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, another likely candidate, told the audience that the White House is "trying to achieve through regulation what it can't pass through legislation," meaning that the EPA's authority should be curbed when it comes to regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

At last year's CPAC, climate change denier Marc Morano attracted a large audience whom he told that climate change represented "a political movement. It is not a scientific movement." He received wild applause.

Gingrich's comments were coupled with his other ideas that will affect the health of the planet. He wants to increase offshore drilling ("Drill, Baby, Drill" was Newt's creation) and remove any regulation on fracking.


British Council gets in on the climate act

Why is the British Council spending taxpayers' money on the recruiting of 100,000 "international climate champions", asks Christopher Booker




More than £3.5 million has gone on recruiting a worldwide network of young "climate activists" in over 70 countries to engage in climate change propaganda - what Marxists used to call agitprop - and to pressure their politicians to join the worldwide struggle.



All this, it is comforting to know, is being led by the climate-change activist Dr David Viner, formerly employed by East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (the focus of the "Climategate" emails scandal), who is most famous for the prediction he made in 2001, that within a few years winter snow would become "a very rare and exciting event". No doubt the climate champions we are funding in the eastern US will have been grateful for our support last week as they tried to explain the several feet of snow across the region which broke records established in the 1880s. What it all has to do with Macbeth or Pride and Prejudice is something of a mystery.





No comments: