## Tuesday, July 6, 2010

### AGW is Science Fiction Hiding Behind False Computer "Models"

Email from Alan Siddons: John O'Sullivan alerted me to this post:

The Sun heats the Earth and the Earth heats the atmosphere
...heat energy CANNOT flow from Cold to Warm objects

If Back Radiation actually reached and heated the Earth as Trenberth shows, then Parabolic Mirror Solar Ovens would produce heating Day and Night

IT IS “NOT POSSIBLE” FOR BACK RADIATION FROM A COLDER ATMOSPHERE TO HEAT UP A WARMER EARTH

Solar cookers prove this. And a simple thermometer proves the same thing in daytime. No matter how hot an object gets in the sun, and no matter how  well it is protected from convective and conductive heat losses, its temperature will correspond only to the solar irradiance it is receiving. There is no evidence of any other thermal radiation source.

But who is standing in the way of destroying this silly heating-via-reverse-radiation fantasy once and for all? Influential AGW skeptics like [names deleted-legal]. For they regard the fantasy as real -- and those who dismiss it as delusional.

Terry Oklberg’s post was very well done.
——
The basic cause and effect of the Sun-Earth-Atmosphere system is:

The Sun heats the Earth and the Earth heats the atmosphere.

The Sun is the only energy source and the Earth and atmosphere are merely passive receivers of the Sun energy.

Now, some points about “Kiehl-Trenberth” (K-T) diagram:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/Earthebal.html#c1

Let’s look at Trenberth’s balance of energy at the Earth’s surface.Incoming energy at the Earth’s surface:

1) Solar Energy = 168 w/m² (the ONLY energy source)
2) Back-radiation = 324 w/m²  (comes from the atmosphere that is NOT an Energy source and gets ALL its energy ultimately from the SUN!)

Total = 492 w/m²

The only energy source, the Sun, only provides 168 w/m²  and the Back-radiation 324 w/m²  exceeds this value, so energy was created violating the Law of Conservation of Energy.

Totaling these to give 492 w/m² is like having a Battery powering an electronic circuit and adding the watts received by a resistor to the watts the Battery supplies.

Outgoing energy at the Earth’s surface:

1) Thermals = 24 w/m²
2) Evapo-transpiration = 78 w/m²
3) Surface Radiation = 390 w/m²

Total = 492 w/m²

ALL the above MUST get ALL their energy from the only energy source, the SUN.
The Sun only provides 168 w/m²  so energy was created again.
—————-
The important points are:

- The Back-Radiation of 324 w/m²  is constantly required to heat the Earth’s surface to maintain a +15 deg C average temperature.
- This Back-Radiation is available Day and Night.
- The Back-Radiation exceeds the Solar Energy of 168 w/m² .
———————————
Parabolic Dishes are used to concentrate energy at a focal point.

These are used in applications ranging from Parabolic Microphones, UHF antennas, Microwave Antennas and Parabolic Mirror Solar Ovens.

The Parabolic Mirror Solar Ovens will concentrate visible light from the Sun as well IR Back-Radiation at its focal point to produce heating.

Remember the “Kiehl-Trenberth” (K-T) diagram has Solar Energy only at 168 w/m²  and Back-Radiation at 324 w/m²  (available Day and Night).

————————
Here is an experiment done by the Physics Dept. at Brigham Young University that PROVES that Back-Radiation CANNOT heat the Earth.

Solar Cookers and Other Cooking Alternatives

“The second area of solar cookers I looked at was their potential use for cooling. I tested to see how effective they are at cooling both at night and during the day. During both times, the solar cooker needs to be aimed away from buildings, and trees.

These objects have thermal radiation and will reduce the cooling effects. At night the solar cooker needs to also be aimed straight up towards the cold sky. During the day the solar cooker needs to be turned so that it does not face the Sun and also points towards the sky.

For both time periods cooling should be possible because all bodies emit thermal radiation by virtue of their temperature. So the heat should be radiated outward.

Cooling should occur because of the second law of thermodynamics which states that heat will flow naturally from a hot object to a cold object.

The sky and upper atmosphere will be at a lower temperature than the cooking vessel. The average high-atmosphere temperature is approximately -20 °C.

So the heat should be radiated from the cooking vessel to the atmosphere.”

http://solarcooking.org/research/McGuire-Jones.mht
—-
This link shows that heating of the Earth’s surface cannot occur from the Back-Radiation of the colder atmosphere.

In fact, the article shows how to COOL items placed in the Solar Oven at NIGHT AND DAY!

All you have to do is point the Oven away from the Sun during the Day and the Oven will transfer heat from the WARM object in the Oven to the COOLER atmosphere!

It can even be used to produce ICE when the ambient air temp is +6 deg C!

“If at night the temperature was within 6 °C or 10°F of freezing, nighttime cooling could be used to create ice. Previous tests at BYU (in the autumn and with less water) achieved ice formation by 8 a.m. when the minimum ambient night-time temperature was about 48 °F.”

And, this also confirms the validity of 2nd Law of Thermodynamics….heat energy CANNOT flow from Cold to Warm objects.
—————————-
Summary:
——————
AGW theory and the Greenhouse Effect has been proven to violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and the Law of Conservation of Energy.

Actual measurements confirm this.

If Back Radiation actually reached and heated the Earth as Trenberth shows, then Parabolic Mirror Solar Ovens would produce heating Day and Night!

Why do the AGW so called “scientists” not promote the use of Back-Radiation as a clean energy source available DAY and NIGHT and solve all our energy problems?

BECAUSE IT IS “NOT POSSIBLE” FOR BACK RADIATION FROM A COLDER ATMOSPHERE TO HEAT UP A WARMER EARTH…THAT’S WHY!

AGW/Greenhouse Effect has been presented to the public as some sort of ‘scientific fact’ when it is actually based on false science.

1. Email received from someone who wrote to Dr. Kevin Trenberth to ask why his IPCC earth energy budget does not show that "greenhouse" gases radiate isotropically. Dr. Trenberth's reply seems to indicate he still believes in the Arrhenius "GHGs are like a glass pane" paper completely falsified by RW Wood and even Arrhenius himself! Email exchange:

It radiates in all directions of course, but the atmosphere is not a single layer, it is 3 dimensional. Here one can simplify to 2D in the vertical. So this calculation has to be done with the full vertical structure of the absorbers (the greenhouse gases and clouds), to get the right result. The emissions do relate to the temperatures, and so near
the Earth's surface the greenhouse gases are warm and not much colder than the surface itself. On the other hand, the tops of clouds and the ozone layer are much cooler and the emissions that escape to space come from above 15 km up.

Hope this helps
Kevin Trenberth

> Hello Dr. Trenberth,
>
> I am trying to understand your Earth energy budget diagram and was
> wondering if you would be so kind to help me out on this-
>
> Given that greenhouse gases re-radiate IR isotropically, why does the
> budget show 342 Wm-2 radiated from greenhouse gases to the surface and
> only 165 Wm-2 (or 195 including clouds) radiated from greenhouse gases to
> outer space?

2. "The Sun heats the Earth and the Earth heats the atmosphere
...heat energy CANNOT flow from Cold to Warm objects"

Where in the Kiehl-Trenberth diagram is shown a net flow of energy from atmosphere to earth?

3. Mostly: see
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-unphysical-agw-simulator-available.html

4. I'm well aware of BOTH versions of the K&T diagram - that one is the older 1997 version. However, all I can see is "surface radiation" 390 and "back radiation" 324 w/m². My simple brain does the arithmetic and comes up with a net upward flow, FROM WARMER TO COOLER of 66 w/m².

I see that none of the experts round here have noticed the real glaring error on that diagram, that all 324 w/m² is absorbed by the surface with NO ALBEDO EFFECT.

5. K+T diagram is ridicolous in several respects (I am an engineer, but even high school students can understand the point):

1) it is a huge violation of the conservation of energy, 168 W/m2 of solar irradiance to the surface cannot produce 324 W/m2 of "backradiation" from gases, 168 W/m2 Ir radiation cannot produce more than 168 W/m2 just passing through inert gases.

2) It is impossible to add up two heat fluxes entering a surface from two opposite directions: fluxes have to be SUBTRACTED, and not added (even as EM waves, IR waves are Poynting vectors propagating from two opposite directions, and they cannot be added up to get the power through the surface.)

3) Several people said that there is no violation in the K+T diagram, because the system is equilibrate, and every heat flux gives a total = 0. But this is a ridicolus interpretation.
In that diagram there would be equilium even putting into the system any figures you want, for instance:

a) you could put 168 W/m2 solar irradiance, 78 + 24 (102) W/m2 evaporation + geothermal in exit, + 3000 (!!) W/m2 backradiation in entrance, which becomes 3066 (3000 + 66) W/m2 in exit, of which 40 + 30 + 165 (235) W/m2 are emitted by the atmosphere to space.

At the end you will have always 168 W/m2 in entrance, and 235 W/m2 outgoing radiation, even with a ridicolous "backradiation".

Or you can put a fantastic 40.000 W/m2 (!!!) backradiation, that would give 40.000 + 66 = 40.066 W/m2 in exit, and from 40.066 you show that 40+30+165 are outgoing radiation to space, and again you would have 168 W/m2 in entrance, and 235 outgoing radiation, with a crazy 40.000 W/m2 backradiation.

The diagram is like a dog biting his own tail, you can insert (as Heinz Thieme rightly said) ANY number of backradiation you want, and at the end the total is always 0, and the system is in "equilibrium".

That diagram is just junk-science...

Alberto

6. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/04/what-determines-temperature/#comment-73623