Saturday, April 16, 2011

Another blow to warmist theory: Decreasing radiation from greenhouse gases

The anthropogenic global warming theory is based upon the notion that increasing 'greenhouse gases' will increase infrared 'back-radiation' to the earth to [supposedly] warm the planet. The theory also claims that increases in the minor 'greenhouse gas' carbon dioxide will cause increases in the major 'greenhouse gas' water vapor to amplify the infrared 'back-radiation' and global warming. A study published online yesterday in The Journal of Climate, however, finds that contrary to the global warming theory, infrared 'back-radiation' from greenhouse gases has declined over the past 14 years in the US Southern Great Plains in winter, summer, and autumn. If the anthropogenic global warming theory was correct, the infrared 'back-radiation' should have instead increased year-round over the past 14 years along with the steady rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide. 

Journal of Climate 2011 ; e-View
doi: 10.1175/2011JCLI4210.1

Long-Term Trends in Downwelling Spectral Infrared Radiance over the U.S. Southern Great Plains

P. Jonathan Gero, Space Science and Engineering Center, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

David D. Turner, NOAA / National Severe Storms Laboratory, Norman, Oklahoma and Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin

Abstract: A trend analysis was applied to a 14-year time series of downwelling spectral infrared radiance observations from the Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer (AERI) located at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) site in the U.S. Southern Great Plains. The highly accurate calibration of the AERI instrument, performed every 10 minutes, ensures that any statistically significant trend in the observed data over this time can be attributed to changes in the atmospheric properties and composition, and not to changes in the sensitivity or responsivity of the instrument. The measured infrared spectra, numbering over 800,000, were classified as clear-sky, thin cloud, and thick cloud scenes using a neural network method. The AERI data record demonstrates that the downwelling infrared radiance is decreasing over this 14-year time period in the winter, summer, and autumn seasons but is increasing in the spring; these trends are statistically significant and are primarily due to long-term change in the cloudiness above the site. The AERI data also show many statistically significant trends on annual, seasonal, and diurnal time scales, with different trend signatures identified in the separate scene classifications. Given the decadal time span of the dataset, effects from natural variability should be considered in drawing broader conclusions. Nevertheless, this data set has high value due to the ability to infer possible mechanisms for any trends from the observations themselves, and to test the performance of climate models.


  1. That is consistent with the temperature trend in the contiguous 48 states of the USA for the last 14 years. The trend has been down about 1 degree F per decade since 1998. This can easily be plotted at the USA federal government National Climatic Data Center. Here is the link:

  2. Since the article states that the reason for the reduction in back-radiation is because of changes in cloud cover at the measurement site, I wouldn't jump to any precipitate conclusions.
    The most interesting point is that the anti-science brigade, who claim that back-radiation doesn't exist at all, now wish to publicise measurements which say it may be decreasing?
    Need to get your story straight.

  3. This study, debunking the greenhouse effect, confirms what others have been claiming... Dr. Charles R. Anderson, Dr. Martin Hertzberg, Alan Siddons and Hans Schreuder, just to name a few.

    Surely this must now leave the IPCC legless? At the heart of the IPCC's mantra is the green house effect. If that is debunked, then what has the IPCC got left to support its mantra?

    This must be 'checkmate' for the IPCC and all the governments wasting hundreds of billion of dollars to fix a non-existent problem.

    But will the world get to know about this study? I bet not... unless someone can get an audience with someone more important than the Pope... Rupert Murdoch, to have him spread the news via his global media empire.

  4. Anonymous #1:

    Do I need to remind you that clouds are formed from water vapor, the major greenhouse gas claimed to be controlled by CO2?

    Skeptics don't make the claim that back-radiation doesn't exist. They show that back-radiation from a colder body (the atmosphere) cannot heat a hotter body (earth) due to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

  5. Anonymous said;
    "The most interesting point is that the anti-science brigade, who claim that back-radiation doesn't exist at all, now wish to publicise measurements which say it may be decreasing?"

    I see, so you claim the following lot belong to "the anti science brigade";

    "Jonathan Gero, Space Science and Engineering Center, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, David D. Turner, NOAA / National Severe Storms Laboratory, Norman, Oklahoma and Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin–Madison, Madison, Wisconsin".

    Very intelligent comment.

  6. Anonymous at 4-18-2011 5:13 am- you are correct about these real scientists and may others from Angstrom 1903, R.W.Wood 1909, Gerlich & Tschneuschner, 2009 that have shown that the "greenhouse gas effect" does not and can not happen.
    What the AGW do not understand is there is IR and many other types of radiation going thought the atmosphere and it does not cause atmospheric warming. This is because Niels Bohr provided in his 1922-23 Noble Prize work in physics that when a gas (any gas) absorbs radiation it does not cause warming of the gas.
    Warming of the atmosphere is caused by conduction and convection by earth and water absorbing the radiation and heating.
    Every body, atom, molecule that is above absolute zero is radiating IR and other wavelengths of radiations in all directions.. Proven laws of physics and thermodynamics; not unproven Fairy-tales of the "greenhouse gas effect"
    See the reference "Slaying the Sky Dragoon" and others.

  7. It s true that a cool body cannot warm a black/grey body but it can cause it to cool less for a given amount of outward radiation.

    Say we had no moon, the earth would be cooler because the amount of earth-shine reflected back by the moon would just radiate out into space.

    It makes perfect sense to me and I am a dyed in the wool skeptic.

  8. I guess you could also say this study points out once again just how important and not fully understood, clouds are to the climate.