Buying a Tesla vs Pyrgeometer Realities
If you feel depressed, here are two nice ways to get happy again: Buy a Tesla or a Pyrgeometer.
You know what a Tesla is and what a pyrgeometer is can be read by downloading the manual for the Kipp and Zonen CGR3 Pyrgeometer. It shows that a pyrgeometer, when directed to the sky, on its display shows Downwelling Long Wave Radiation DLWR (also named back radiation) from a colder atmosphere to a warmer Earth surface of typically size 340 W/m2 to be compared with the 170 W/m2 absorbed by the surface from the Sun, about two extra Suns.
If you are a CO2 alarmist this makes you really happy because you can now point to these two extra Suns as a supposed massive effect from so called atmospheric greenhouse gasses supposed to radiate massive DWLR.
Now, the manual shows that the thermopile of the pyrgeometer measures a voltage scaling with the difference of atmospheric and Earth surface temperature of typically 15 C with estimated net radiative flux of 60 W/m2 from the surface to the atmosphere.
That is what is measured, which is not so fun to look at for an alarmist, so to make such people happy Kipp and Zonen instead displays 340 W/m2 from the atmosphere to the surface computed from the following equation
- 400 = 340 + 60,
where 400 is by Planck postulated Outgoing Long Wave Radiation OLWR from the pyrgeometer at 15 C, as if the pyrgeometer as a blackbody is in radiative contact with the cold outer space at 0 Kelvin. Further, 340 is DWLR and 60 as above radiation from surface to atmosphere. So we get 340 = 400 – 60 as DWLR.
But doing so the pyrgeometer acts as a ghost detector by assuming massive OLWR from the pyrgeometer as if it is in radiative contact with cold outer space at 0 C, while in fact it is radiative contact with a 15 C colder atmosphere. What is measured is 60 up, but what is reported is 340 down.
This is nothing but scientific fraud created by a misrepresentation of a key physical fact: The pyrgeometer is not in radiative contact with outer space at 0 K, but with a 15 C colder atmosphere (the atmospheric window is small). This is massive fraud serving as the instrumental basis for Net Zero, which if implemented would throw humanity back to the Stone Edge at greatly reduced numbers. Can you think of something bigger?
When you realise this you will get depressed again, but then after a second thought you can restore happiness by recalling that you have revealed/understood the scientific fraud of global warming, and then you can proceed to a happy life without worrying about CO2 emissions and Net Zero. Happy, right?
To compare with the Tesla, suppose your Government offers you a massive repay/refund as Downwelling Government Money DGM of 70.000 dollars if you purchase a new Tesla for 80.000 and thus only have to pay net 10.000 according to the formula:
- 80 = 70 + 10.
You would then get happy, right? But you may quickly get a second thought and ask who will pay the DGM? From where can this money come? Could it be that it will come from taxes you pay, so that in fact you have to pay the full amount 80.000, which is way beyond your budget.
Ok, so this will make you depressed. But again, when you realise that there is no need for any Tesla at all if there is no Net Zero, and so you are not pressed to buy a Tesla to save the World. Happy, right?
If you don’t think that what I say above is true, take a look at the following Earth’s Energy Budget presented by NASA:
Compare now with the Wikipedia energy budget without Back Radiation DWLR:
We thus meet two versions of Earth’s energy budget underlying CO2 alarmism, one with and one without Back Radiation. This connects to Bohr’s idea of complementarity: Light is both particles (photons) and waves, which are viewed not as contradictory but simply as complementary views of a richer particle-wave phenomenon.
In fact, any contradiction in physics can be handled this way, in particular Earth’s energy budget, which in a fundamental way is based on Back Radiation (top picture), while at the same time it has nothing to do with any such concept (below picture).
Back Radiation is truly fundamental, yet you can do without it completely. It exists and does not exist, and that is no contradiction, only complementary views. This is modern physics at its best.
If you have in your hands both A and notA as being true, then you can win any discussion. Whatever your opponent say, A or notA, you can say that he/she is wrong and that you are right. Very clever strategy.
See more here: claesjohnson
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Herb Rose
| #
The Pyrgeometer has the same inherent flaw as a thermometer. It is measuring the amount of energy being transferred to it (either by convection or radiation) and not the energy of the objects emitting energy.
If you light one candle the instruments will measure the energy coming from that candle and striking the instrument. If you light a thousand candle the reading on the instrument will increase as more energy is transferred to it, even though the energy being emitted from every candle is the same. It is not measuring the kinetic energy of the source. Since the surface of the Earth has 1,000 molecules transferring energy for every molecule in the atmosphere (from a fixed distance instead of various distances) there is no way to tell what the kinetic energy of the molecules are and if the surface molecules are transferring energy to the gas molecules or vice versa.
Reply
Tom Anderson
| #
In his experiment , ‘Observations on “Backradiation” during Nighttime and Daytime,” Professor Nasif Nahle identified cirrus clouds and globules of rising warm air that transported thermal radiation to higher altitudes. He observed them absorbing, reflecting, scattering, and emitting radiation. Surface and atmospheric measurements showed that none of it flows to the warmer surface:
“Infrared thermometers, radiometers, pyrgeometers, and pyrometers are measuring apparent temperature, i.e. content of thermal energy of an array of highly variable subsystems in the atmosphere, not thermal backradiation. There are not surfaces emitting radiation in the atmosphere. The recorded values correspond to a combination of radiation which is an average made by the instruments from a series of instantaneous measurements of globules of air moving up, stratus clouds, water vapor present in the atmosphere, and dust particles. In conclusion, backradiation from a cooler atmosphere warming up a warmer surface is a myth …”
Nahle, Nasif, “Observations of ‘backradiation’ during nighttime and daytime,” Biology Cabinet, Principia Scientific International, Sept 26, 2011.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Tom,
All objects with energy radiate energy so all the gas molecules in the atmosphere are emitting radiated energy. The amount of energy emitted is a function of the energy of the molecules and the number of molecules emitting radiation. As altitude increases the number of molecules decreases (An indication that the molecules have more energy, UGL) unlike in water (where the number of molecules is fairly constant and where a thermometer is calibrated) so how do you know that the lower reading of the instrument is the result of greater energy of molecules transferring energy or greater number of molecules transferring energy?
In the troposphere, where energy is transferred between the Earth and atmosphere, it is done by convection (collisions) not radiation. These collisions and transfer of energy follow the law of Conservation of Energy and an object with greater velocity will transfer energy to an object with less energy regardless of the masses of the objects. In convection an object with less kinetic energy (due to little mass) can add energy to a larger object with more kinetic energy (but less velocity).
Professor Nasif believes these instruments are giving an accurate measurement of the energy of the molecules, not the amount of energy being given off by the molecules. He is wrong.
Herb
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Claes Johnson and PSI Readers,
You and many readers doubt the existence of downwelling infrared radiation as measured by the NOAA SURFRAD (surface radition) PROJECT. (https://gml.noaa.gov/grad/surfrad/dataplot.html)
I doubt if you and these other doubters have studied the data produced by this project, if you and others have even gone to this link to take a LOOK at the data being measured. Ultimately this project had seven locations: Bondville, IL., Fort Peck, MT., Goodwin Creek, MS., Table Mountain, CO., Sioux Falls, SD., Desert Rock, NV., Penn State, PA. And ultimately six radiations were measured by the project’s specially designed instruments: DOWNWELLING SOLAR, UPWELLING SOLAR, DIRECT-NORMAL SOLAR, DIFFUSE SOLAR, DOWNWELLING INFRARED, UPWELLING INFRARED.
Ultimately is critical word for at the beginning only the data of the first three locations were measured and reported for July 1995 (this is not to imply that the July data is the first reported). Just that this nearly is the longest daytime and shortest nighttime. And the longest daytime and shortness nighttime was at Fort Peck.
If you do not go the link to review this early data measured and reported by this NOAA project, please do not criticize the honesty of the NOAA scientists and engineers. For you will find that these scientists and engineers, when they SAW the first data being measured realized that they had GOOFED.
I stop here and ask you DOUBTERs—What was their goof? And if there are no replies I must conclude that you doubters are all talk and NO GO.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Doubters,
I am going to try to keep this article and my question What was their (NOAA’s) goof? before you until someone comment about one considers it to be. Doesn’t have to be right. Better a wrong answer than no answer.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Doubters,
(https://gml.noaa.gov/grad/surfrad/dataplot.html)
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Whokoo
| #
I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
From up and down, and still somehow
It’s cloud illusions I recall
I really don’t know clouds at all
Joni Mitchell
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi PSI Readers and WhoKoo,
Readers, I looked up Joni Michell and all the lyrics she wrote. She is an original and so is WhoKoo and so is each one of you and so am I. But as Richard Feynman stated time after time; Science is never certain. That the only thing that can be certain is that which is NOT. Albert Einstein stated: “All religions, arts, and sciences are branches of the same tree.” For if one ponders these three topics, one might see that this TREE is UNCERTAINTY.
So Readers. WhoKoo’s lesson might be: Don’t trust anyone who claims to know what is. Only trust what might be!
However, just as we SCIENTISTS are uncertain about what is as RELIGOUS PEOPLE and ARTISTS are; Scientists have method of ABSOLUTELY PROVING WHAT IS NOT and the method is simple OBSERVATION (sight, feel, smell, taste. hear), sometimes using invented instruments as artists do.
WhoKoo, I have tried to go where you went and where I seldom go. Now will you go to the data source, to which I linked, and tell me what the scientists and engineers who designed the SURFRAD project did not imagine until they observed what was simply seen. If I can do it, so can you.
Yes, I am trying to be a TEACHER as Louis Agassiz was. Who claimed that he had taught some students to SEE. But even the TEACHER Agassiz did not see a MOST OBVIOUS and SIMPLE thing about LIFE. FACT: we humans all MAKE MISTAKES no matter however talented a human might seem to be.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Claes,
Are you afraid of what you might see if you go the link of the Surfrad Data as I have suggested?
Have good a day, Jerry
Reply
olav ankjær
| #
If you use a normal infrared temperature gauge, like the one I use to measure the temperature of racing tires or the asphalt during a race, it always shows -18c if it points towards the sky.
As we think we know (learned school science) everything radiates its own temperature.
All constituents (gases-dust-aerosols) in the atmosphere collide with each other insanely many times per second, the higher the density the greater the frequency. These collisions cause conduction of heat.
Why is -18c the dominant temperature you measure if you point the measuring instrument directly (straight) towards the sky?
Now, I’ve never been to the poles, but I’ve measured straight up to the sky at a great many latitudes in many places on earth and I’ve never measured anything but -18c.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi WhoKoo,
My cousin just sent this.
Old Farmer’s Advice:
Your fences need to be horse-high, pig-tight and bull-strong.
Keep skunks and bankers at a distance.
Life is simpler when you plow around the stump.
A bumble bee is considerably faster than a John Deere tractor.
Words that soak into your ears are whispered…not yelled.
Meanness don’t jes’ happen overnight.
Forgive your enemies; it messes up their heads.
Do not corner something that you know is meaner than you.
It don’t take a very big person to carry a grudge.
You cannot unsay a cruel word.
Every path has a few puddles.
When you wallow with pigs, expect to get dirty.
The best sermons are lived, not preached.
Most of the stuff people worry about ain’t never gonna happen anyway.
Don ‘t judge folks by their relatives.
Remember that silence is sometimes the best answer.
Live a good, honorable life.. Then when you get older and think back,
you’ll enjoy it a second time.
Don ‘t interfere with somethin’ that ain’t bothering you none.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a Rain dance.
If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop diggin’.
Sometimes you get, and sometimes you get got.
The biggest troublemaker you’ll probably ever have to deal with,
watches you from the mirror every mornin’.
Always drink upstream from the herd.
Good judgment comes from experience,
and a lotta that comes from bad judgment.
Lettin’ the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier than puttin’ it back in.
If you get to thinkin’ you’re a person of some influence,
try orderin’ somebody else’s dog around..
Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God.
Don’t pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight,
he’ll just kill you.
Reply