“Simple Experiment on Global Warming” Debunks Radiative Greenhouse Effect

Written by Joseph E Postma on November 22, 2021. Posted in Current News

In September of 2020 the “Royal Society Open Science” journal published a peer-reviewed article claiming to provide experimental evidence for the mechanism of global warming, i.e., the radiative greenhouse effect.

In summary, the experiment was this: fill a balloon alternately with air, and with carbon dioxide, and measure how quickly a hot electrical element heated with power from outside to +50⁰C placed inside the balloon cools down.

Thus, right from the foundation of this experiment we may identify that it has nothing to do with the radiative greenhouse effect of climate alarmist political science, which is the actual basis of global warming theory. For, what is the radiative greenhouse effect of climate science? We see it in the next figure.

The mechanism of the radiative greenhouse effect of climate science, as opposed to the mechanism of a real greenhouse, is found in “backradiation” where the radiation from the cold atmosphere causes the temperature of the warmer surface to rise to higher temperature.

We note that although climate science calls this proposed mechanism of “back radiation” a “greenhouse effect”, real greenhouses function by limiting convective cooling and their internal temperatures do not rise above the temperature at which they are heated by the Sunlight. In the “greenhouse effect” of climate science, “backradiation” is said to cause the temperature of the ground surface to rise above the temperature at which it is heated by the Sunlight.

From the previous figure, sparing the details of the minutia and assuming that the reader has some familiarity with this scheme, the climate science greenhouse effect and in fact the very foundation of climate science is such that it treats the Sunlight as being unable to create the climate at all, where the Sun has only a maximum of -18⁰C heating potential for the surface of the Earth.

Climate science starts here because it dilutes solar power over the entire surface of the Earth as if the Earth is a flat plane, which by mathematical consequence is this treatment forces the Sunlight to be reduced to a heating power of  -18⁰C from its actual intensity at the Earth of +121⁰C. Under this erroneous premise that the Sunlight cannot create the climate or heat the Earth above -18⁰C, climate science then postulates a “backradiation” or radiative greenhouse effect, where the cold atmosphere recycles or sends heat back to the warmer surface to increase the temperature of the surface from -18⁰C to +15⁰C.

Does the experiment published by the RSOS actually demonstrate this in some sort of experimental analogy? Not at all. Not in any way whatsoever. It doesn’t touch upon climate science’s proposed warming mechanism at all. All that the experiment did was place a 50⁰C element into a balloon, and then watch the temperature drop. What the experiment should have been able to do, and what it should have been designed and intended to do, particularly in the case where the balloon was filled with 100% CO₂, was show that, for example, a heating element placed inside the balloon at -18⁰ (or any value) was bumped up in temperature to some much higher value. Nothing of the sort was demonstrated at any temperature, and nothing of the sort was even attempted nor discussed, thus demonstrating that neither the authors, nor the peer-reviewers, had any idea what they’re actually supposed to be testing. This is the state of climate science and peer-review!

This is not a novel argument to attempt to feign evidence or reasoning for climate science’s “greenhouse effect”. We have witnessed it many times. For when it is pointed out that the backradiation heating mechanism of climate science’s greenhouse effect violates thermodynamic law in that it posits heat flow from cold to hot (an impossibility), then the argument switches from direct heating and direct temperature increase caused by backradiation to “backradiation slows down cooling which leads to higher average temperature over time since the surface doesn’t cool down as far”.

Of course, that changes the entire premise of the initial argument, changes the goal posts, and changes the entire field: for slowing down cooling from a maximum solar heating of -18⁰C such that, say, it reaches only -25⁰C instead of -35⁰C, does not cause the average between such values to become +15⁰C!

What they need to demonstrate is some cool temperature becoming a much higher temperature, not merely a cool temperature cooling more slowly to some even cooler temperature.

All of the experimental and empirical evidence required to demonstrate, or disprove, whatever mutually-exclusive mechanism of climate science’s “greenhouse effect” one wishes to subscribe to, is provided in an actual greenhouse. For an actual greenhouse does produce its own “back radiation” or “slowed cooling” internally in any case. Do real greenhouses demonstrate that internal temperatures can be achieved which are higher than the temperature at which they are being heated by the Sun?

There are numerous examples of such experiments being performed starting even with the so-called “father” of modern thermodynamics in Josef Fourier, and exclusively, it has never been demonstrated that a back radiation mechanism exists which should have caused observed temperatures to exceed that at which they were generated by the Sun.

The mechanism of climate science’s “greenhouse effect” should function in any greenhouse, yet the results are never observed, which therefore proves that the mechanism does not exist. It is the Sun which heats greenhouses, just as it is the Sun which heats the Earth and creates the climate.

That is: The premise which climate science refuses is that the Sun creates the climate.

Read more at climateofsophistry.com

Please note: Any specific questions to Joe Postma should be posted at his blog, not in the comments section below.

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19

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.